The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About10/16/07 PC Reports CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA MICHAEL O'NEAL, CHAIRMAN JOHN GONZALES, VICE CHAIRMAN JIMMY FLORES, COMMISSIONER AXEL ZANELLI, COMMISSIONER PHIL MENDOZA, COMMISSIONER ROLFE PREISENDANZ,DIR. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WWW.LAK6ELSINORE.ORG (951) 674-3124 PHONE (951) 674-2392 FAX LAKE ELSINORE CULTURAL CENTER 183 NORTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530 ******************************************************************* TUESDAY, OCTOBER 16, 2007 6:00 P.M. The City of Lake Elsinore appreciates your attendance. Citizens' interest provides the Planning Commission with valuable information regarding issues of the community. Meetings are held on the 15t and 3rd Tuesday of every month. If you are attending this Planning Commission meeting, please park in the Parking Lot across the street from the Cultural Center. This will assist us in limiting the impact of meetings on the Downtown Business District. Thank you for your cooperation. The agenda is posted 72 hours prior to each meeting outside of City Hall and is available at each meeting. The agenda and related reports are also available in the Community Development Department on the Friday prior to the Planning Commission meeting. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, any person with a disability who requires a modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should contact the City Clerk's Office at (951) 674-3124, ext. 262, at least 48 hours before the meeting to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMENTS - NON AGENDIZED ITEMS - 3 MINUTES (Please read & complete a Speaker's Form at the podium, prior to the start of the Planning Commission Meeting) CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS (All matters on the Consent Calendar are approved in one motion, unless a Commissioner or any members of the public requests separate action on a specific item.) 1. Reaular Plannina Commission Meetina Minutes for April 17. 2007 Recommendation: Approval 2. Joint City Council/Plan nino Commission Special Study Session Meetino Minutes for February 1. 2007 Recommendation: Approval 3. Minor Desion Review of a Sino Ie-Story Sino Ie-Family Residence located at 17002 Rose Avenue (APN's: 375-034-034. 035. 036 & 037 Recommendation: Approval 4. Minor Desion Review of a Sinole-Family Residence located at 408 N. Lewis Street (APN: 374-032-007) Recommendation: Approval 5. Minor Desion Review of a Sino Ie-Family Residence located at 30348 Baum Avenue (APN: 375-324-027) Recommendation: Approval PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS (Please read & complete a Speaker's Form at the podium prior to the start of the Planning Commission Meeting. The Chairman will call on you to speak when your item is called). 6. Text Amendment No. 2007-05 -Amendino and Restatino Section 17.35.020 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code reoardino Residential Uses in Open Space Districts Recommendation: Approval 7. Deletino and Reservino Chapter 17.06 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code reoardino the Resource Conservation Overlay District Recommendation: Approval 8. Annexation No. 82. General Plan Amendment No. 2007-05. and Zone Chanoe No. 2007 -05 - Runnino Deer Annexation Recommendation: Approval 9. Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-15 & Tentative Condominium Parcel Map No. 35707 "Mission Trail Professional Office Buildino Complex" Recommendation: Approval 10. Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-12 for a drive throuoh lane located at Plannino Area No.4. Buildino No. 18 within the Canyon Hills Market Place Recommendation: Approval 11. Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-13 for outdoor dinina area to accommodate a restaurant located at Plannina Area No.4. Buildina No. 16 within the Canyon Hills Market Place Recommendation: Approval BUSINESS ITEMS 12. Uniform Sian Proaram Modification No. 2007-07 "Lake Elsinore Outlet Stores" Recommendation: Continuance INFORMA TIONAL STAFF COMMENTS PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT The Lake Elsinore Planning Commission will adjourn to a regular meeting to be held on Tuesday, November 6,2007, at 6:00 p.m. to be held in the Cultural Center located at 183 N. Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING I, ROLFE PREISENDANZ, Secretary to the Planning Commission, do hereby affirm that a copy of the foregoing agenda was posted at City Hall, 72 hours in advance if this meeting. IIssll ROLFE PREISENDANZ DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 183 NORTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530 TUESDAY, APRIL 17,2007 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman O'Neal called the regular Planning pm. to order at 6:09 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Vice Chair Gonzales led the Pledge of ROLL CALL PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: FLORES, ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Also present were:.<~rfectof\i~gt Commurii~y Development Preisendanz, Planning Manager Weiner,<Depy~y Cit~/Attorney Sa~.t~pa, Public Works Director Seumalo, Associate Planner Carls~~h: Plan.ntng Consultant Miller, Planning Consultant Coury, and Office Spf;lqialJst Herrington. ,-c_: .<_. . >:.::.:,:,:<. PU BLlC;hCOM MENTS.(Non-~QeJ'l~a .Items) No requeststq speak. CONSENT CAISENDAR lieMS Chairman O'Neal pullea Item Numbers 1 and 2 from the Consent Calendar. Chairman O'Neal and Vice Chair Gonzales recused themselves for Item Number 1 because they reside within 500 feet. 1. Minor Design Review of two (2) three-story single-family dwelling units located at 16782 and 16784 Lash Avenue (APN's: 378-263-023/024) Director of Community Development Preisendanz provided an overview of the project and stated that staff requested a continuance of the project until May 1, 2007 AGENDA ITEM NO. { PAGE { OF I 0 PAGE 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - APRIL 17, 2007 Planning Commission meeting in order to address water availability and on-site grading issues. The applicant was not present. MOVED BY ZANELLI, SECONDED BY FLORES, AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 3-0, TO CONTINUE A MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF TWO (2) THREE-STORY SINGLE- FAMILY DWELLING UNITS LOCATED AT 16782 & 16784 LASH AVENUE TO APRIL 17, 2007. Chairman O'Neal and Vice Chair Gonzales rejoined\the..; Planning Commission Meeting. 2. Minor Design Review of a Single-Family Re$ldenc~lg~ated at 310 Lewis Street (APN: 374-082-006) .. Applicant, Saul Arana, 310 Lewis Street, b~~~ Elsinore, read and;~gr~ed with the Conditions of Approval. . ::::::!>::::::: y:::>;;:\-, MOVED BY ZANELLI., SECONDED!lti~~; MENDOZA, AND PASSED BY A VOTEi~!u~-O TO APPRi~~ RESOLUTION NO. 2007-78, A RE~OLlJj[liN OFTf;f~;PLANNING COMMISSION OF THI;,. ciTi~';;i.~ LA~E ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVI~.;~.'MINii'iDESIGN REVIEW FOR A SIN~~I;~FAMIL Y RI;SIDENCI;\jW' PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 3. Conditig~.~'.!..~seP~~~it;N6.;~QQ~P1~, Tentative Tract Map No. 34837 (for cg~domil1iumip.~rpo~I~)' and Residential Design Review No. 2006-18 for ~ilkeshore Villag~ TowQ;~()mes ChairmanO'~~al opened~De Public Hearing at 6:11 pm. Director of Comrnunity~evelopment Preisendanz provided an overview of the project and request~d~Janning Consultant Coury to review it with the Commission and answer questions. Planning Consultant Coury provided an overview of the project. Applicant, Mel Mercado, Corman Leigh Communities, 32823 Highway 79, Temecula, read and agreed with the Conditions of Approval including the modification to Condition Number 6 of the Conditions of Approval regarding construction hours. Planning Consultant Coury read the modification to Condition Number 6 of the Conditions of Approval regarding construction hours. AGENDt~ ITEM NO.~ PACE;) OF -1 C) PAGE 3 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - APRIL 17,2007 REQUESTS TO SPEAK Mr. Elbert Smith, 4491 E. Ridge Gate Drive, Anaheim, distributed a map to the Planning Commission of the proposed development of Lakeshore Village and stated that he owns the 2 'Y2 acre parcel adjacent to the proposed development. He proposed to the Commission that the integration of the two (2) parcels together could enhance the development and suggested emergency vehicle traffic access and circulation at certain points of the development and his property line. Deputy City Attorney stated that per the Brown Act, the Planning Commission is limited to speaking about the Items listed on the Planning Cqmmission Agenda and the conceptual design of his parcel is beyond the scope of this Agenda. Karen Lang, 31008 Ponderosa Street, said she i9<Hvl~~,>behind the proposed Condominium project and stated her concern that!~e;qondos~~e going to be two (2) stories and she thought that the plans were suppQ$ed to be onec(1)story. Planning Consultant Coury stated that the~~llpothing>~ritten in the~qQditions that identifies that only single stories are to be pr6pQ9.~d inlflat.location. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner Flores referred Mr.andf}4rs...Smith t6C~~et with the Community Development Director at a later date tORringthi$!l~m to the Commission. Commissioner Flore~;<ask~~.. about street impr()\iement and re-pavement of sidewalks on Gunnl?rson anqalso askedjf there would be additional stop signs installed. <:::. :::: Public Wor~~>u[)irect?r S~q~li6>'st~teg;i!pafCondition Number 49 requires a traffic signal tOB~installed9:!!hat"I~RCltion which is at the main entrance to the project and at the iQ!~rsection at 6~mpersoQc"~.~Que. The Conditions also require the developer to condu~ti~ traffic study:;;~nd irpplement the results of the approved traffic study. Regarding>$treet improvements at Lakeshore Drive, the project is to include street improvements including curb, gutter and sidewalk and the developer is to deposit the cost for half of the mediar'lthat is going to go into the street and once the other half is developed, the CitYJl?imburses the developer for construction of the median. Commissioner Flores stated that because of safety issues he would like to see the project continue its sidewalk all the way down to Machado Street. Commissioner Mendoza said that after looking at the Tentative Tract Map, he had concerns about the locations of some of the condominiums facing directly into the backyards of various homes near the project. Planning Consultant Coury asked the applicant's Civil Engineer and Architect to address this issue. PACE rvO.. I ~~ -----L-- S OF~ AC[r~t)k':\ PAGE 4 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - APRIL 17,2007 Steve Stan, KTGY Architects, Irvine, asked the Planning Commission to view the Architectural Packets that were distributed and explained the elevations and architecture of the Condominiums. Vice Chair Gonzales asked the applicant's Civil Engineer to view the Tentative Tract Map and asked about the secondary access road. The civil engineer stated that the Fire Department requested that the road be a full secondary access road, and not be used for emergency purposes. Commissioner Zanelli asked Public Works Director Seumalo to clarify Condition Number 49 regarding signal coordination and improvementsafthe main entrance. Public Works Director Seumalo stated that the sigQ.~IWHIRe interconnected and coordinated and the Traffic Study will give them~he timI~g to streamline the connections. Commissioner Zanelli also asked Public '{M~~~s Direq~or that whenm:~gr;ning south bound on Lakeshore Drive, will there be a brahoppff Iql"l~. Public Works Director Seumalo stated that there is'r'l9I''le required because with the sequence of signal lights, the subseqy~n~ impact doesn~quce the speeds. Chairman O'Neal closed the Public He~ring atf:)!~9. pm. MOVED BYG~NZALES, SECONDEI:lBY ZANELLI, AND PASSJ;;P BY't- VOTE ........ OF 5-0, TO APPROVE RESOLl)'TION ~.!1>. 2007-79;",A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING",C!1>~M1S~ION~F THE CITY OF LAKE ~bSI~ORE;\CALIFORNIt-~j;~ECOMMENDING TO THE CITyiiq~ut-lc(~<OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ADOPTI~~> OF~It-JPINGS THAT THE PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH>WESTERN RIVERSIDE MULTIPLE SPECIES H~BITIAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP). MOVI;D BY FLORES, SECONDED BY ZANELLI, AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4-1, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 2007-80, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-12. MOVED BY FLORES, SECONDED BY ZANELLI, AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4-1, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 2007-81, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34837. , ,. I.::J. f PAC E.-!:L-o F .-1SL- PAGE 5 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - APRIL 17, 2007 MOVED BY GONZALES, SECONDED BY ZANELLI, AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4-1, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 2007-82, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, APPROVAL OF RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2006-18. 3. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005-19 Director of Community Development Preisendanz provi8~d>an overview of the project and requested Planning Consultant Miller to re"i~Vv it with the Commission and answer questions. . Planning Consultant Miller noted that there wa~~me~ror in the<OH'J:lber of units and staff would make corrections on all docume~,~~>concerning that cq~n~9tion including Resolutions and Conditions of Approval. ~Jl~~~lso sta~~d that Conditl~,QmNumber 38 of the Conditions of Approval has beencH~~~>~d~,~tQ"e standard"Condition for Affordable Housing and read this into the record>>~9Sithen provided and overview of the project. She also stated that tg~ tenants would~~ye 180 days notice once the conversion takes place and an additj~Q~J,90 days to d~~ige if they want to purchase one (1) of the condominiums. '. ':)!::!</H<Xh:::.,.,';!' :\.... ""<<:U::.:.,:.':::.?:...> .... .......... ... v..... ......' Applicant, Heidi McBroo'J:l.,>~orman L~igh~P'hlfHU~Ui~s,/32823 Highway 79 South, read and agreed with th~~qm9itions of Approval. . Chairman O'NealcIO$~gthe Pqblic Hearing~t9,:56 pm. ,;',:/-:<,:;::>" ./;"::;'.::'..:.-, ;''::'.:/:-,.:.:-.::-.. ...';./.::'....:.:. "'/:'-"//.'/. .,.-/,'.,.,.,-........, PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Ms. McBroornSgId no beq~use they don't have an aggressive timeline in place and are not sure whenthey ar~going to do the conversion. Commissioner Mendoza asked Ms. McBroom if the current tenants are aware of the conversion. Ms. McBroom stated no, because they don't have a timeline of when this will happen. They do not want to create an issue with any of the rentals until they have some factual data on how it will affect them. Commissioner Mendoza requested clarification on Certificate of Occupancy of the project. :.','" "",. ~.)"", I PAC~ L'S~~Y'c;(c;- - PAGE 6 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - APRIL 17,2007 Planning Manager Weiner explained how the Certificate of Occupancy would be issued in order to finalize the conversion from rental unit to single ownership for the actual condominium. Commissioner Flores requested clarification of Condition Number 38 and the Affordable Housing Condition of the Conditions of Approval. Deputy City Attorney Santana clarified Condition Number 38 and Affordable Housing Condition of the Conditions of Approval to Commissioner Flores. Commissioner Zanelli asked if Corman Leigh plans on doing the conversion all at once. Ms. McBroom said it was unknown at this time. MOVED BY MENDOZA, SECON[).E~>BY ZANE~~I, AND PASSED BY A VOTE 9~; 5-0, TO APR~9VE RESOLUTION NO. 2007-8~tl RESOLUTION OFlttE PLANNING COMMISSION/ OFUr'IHE.CI'IY OF LlKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOP'II~C3 FINDINGS THAT THE CONDITIONA~ USE PERMlillu.NO. 2007-05 IS EXEMPT FROM THE>MUL TIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN(M~~CP). MOVED BY FLORES, SECQNDE[)aifMENDOZA, AND PASSED. B~\A VOTE.. OF 5~0, TO APPROVE RESOL!JTION~(). 2007 -8~! A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION >.OF. THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINOR~,;C~~lF9~NIA, lPPROVING CONDITIONAL U~R>RERMI'I~~O~>2()Op~1.~\HWITH MODIFICATIONS AND CORRECTIONSTO CONDITIONS. 5. RQ$idential Design ReviQy.INo. 2006-11 Chairman O'N~al opened the Public Hearing at 7:04 pm. Director of Comml.ll"lJty. Development Preisendanz provided an overview of the project and request~d Planning Consultant Miller to review it with the Commission and answer questions. Planning Consultant Miller provided an overview of the project. Applicant, Heidi McBroom, Corman Leigh, read and agreed with the Conditions of Approval. Requests to speak William Vuist, 276 S. Terra Cotta Road, Lake Elsinore, said he opposes building two (2) story homes in this area. The existing residents are living in single story homes. PACE r~O. ~ ( OF (d PAGE 7 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - APRIL 17,2007 He feels fortunate to live where there is open space and to be able to have views of the mountains for approximately twenty (20) years. He believes building of two (2) story homes infringes on the current residents views. He also asked if there would be a stop sign at Terra Cotta Road and also a signal light installed at Terra Cotta Road and Lakeshore Drive once the development comes. Public Works Director stated that yes there will be a stop sign installed at Terra Cotta Road and at the project entry. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner Mendoza had no questions. Commissioner Flores stated that the project is very niCe: He said his concern is fencing that has been torn down and not replaced and wanted to know what the applicant is doing to satisfy those residents that h;:Jdjheir fenceS r~r;noved. Ms. McBroom stated that they hoped to g~t,~~~wall uR. much soorie~~pd said they have permission from all of the adjacent hom~~~n~~~,fC>r constructign of a wall in lieu of their older fences. The fence and wall plarJ;ii~i)in the second Plan Check, and hopefully will be approved within a week, and theyc~~;~tart immediately. Commissioner Flores asked what hei~httP~~c:lIlS will ber Ms. McBroom stated that the adjacenrhor;n~OWrie~!~signed acceptance of six (6) foot standard walls. Commissioner Zanellihad no ':?'f'!:UU1::>,. :'::;..... _:,::.:,L:,<.:>:.>::<><::::.::_.-.:. _ _,' :::yn< Vice Chair Gonzales saidheis gladto see there is single story homes going in. Chairman O'Neal had no comments. MOVED BYi<MENDOZA, SECONDED BY ZANELLI, AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 5-0, TO APPROVE RESQLUTIQN NO. 2007-85, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING. COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINQRE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF FINDINGS THAT THE PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE MULTIPLE SPECIES HAPITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP). MOVED BY MENDOZA, SECONDED BY ZANELLI, AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 5-0, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 2007-86, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2006-11 AND CORRESPONDING f'-.Gi::iJDi\ iTEM NO. { PAGE -, OF ..J.2__ PAGE 8 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - APRIL 17, 2007 MODEL HOME COMPLEX FOR THE DEVELOPMENT KNOWN AS MAKENNA COURT. Chairman O'Neal opened the Public Hearing at 7:17 pm. 6. Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-08 for a gymnastics and early "Childhood Movement" Facility located at 17945 Collier Avenue within the Collier Avenue Business Center Director of Community Development Preisendanz provided an overview of the project and requested Planning Manager Weiner to review with the Commission and answer questions. Planning Manager Weiner provided an overview of and agreed Applicant, Jeremy Thompson, 29061 Lupin with the Conditions of Approval. Chairman O'Neal closed the Public PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner Flores asked Planning ;M~n~ger Weinerlifthere will be adequate parking with maximum capacity at the fCicility: . footage and the LEMC Planning Manager W~i.ner~tCited yes ba~ed on requires. ".." "",," '.: Commissioner Zanellisa.i<:ih~)i.~91.<3g>to se~}this project come to the City and there will be a lot of kids that wiHbehefitfrornthls. CommissionerMendoza h~d no questions. Chairman O'Neal~~ked Mr. Thompson where he got the name "Twisting Gymnastics" and stated that it is a nice addition to the City. Mr. Thompson stated that they wanted to develop an area where kids can come and train for gymnastics and have fun recreation for the family. There is a monthly rate charged. MOVED BY ZANELLI, SECONDED BY MENDOZA, AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 5-0, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 2007-87, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007 -08. ACENDA ITEM NO.~ PACE 9 0" ,__L2-- PAGE 9 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - APRIL 17,2007 STAFF COMMENTS Public Works Director Seumalo said Temescal Canyon at Lake Street is under construction with the installation of conduits and the project is moving forward. The Grand Ortega Intersection and Signal Light Improvement Project is estimated to be completed by the end of May. Also the Draft Capital Improvement Program for the City of Lake Elsinore was distributed to the Planning Commission for their consideration and recommendation to the City Council for approval and the Study Session will be held this Thursday. He also thanked Administrative Services Director Pressey, Finance Manager Riley, Cathy Barrozo, ..<GIS Department, and Dina Purvis in Engineering for their help in getting this completed. Planning Manager Weiner said the Planning CommissiOri(~III be provided with a meeting schedule advising them of various meetings coming iMP such as Quarterly Developer's meetings, Utilities meeting, etc. andtt;leCommis~Ign will be given a monthly update. Chairman O'Neal asked about MSHCP Presentation. Community Development Directo(.preisendanzst~~~d that he spoke to Wendy Worthey, Principal Environmental~JallQer and asked>her. to prepare a formal MSHCP Presentation and said he isnot~/-.lxe of the dat.~of the presentation. He also stated that the Quarterly Devel(j8~r'sM.~~tin~ has.;oeen very productive and one of the discussions wa.~...the TIF upd~te.<He stat~~..(that the weekly meeting with Chairman O'Neal was v~ryprpductive in rl?viewing tt;le Agenda. Deputy City Attorneyt;l~d no cO!)lments. Commissioner Zanelli ask~d ifthel;!1~~ting schedule could be provided to the Commissioners elec;;trgnically. PlannirigManager Wein~~~tatedYes. Commissioner Zanelli ask~c1 if the MSHCP Presentation could be presented prior to the upcoming issul?on a particular acreage section. Community Development Director Preisendanz stated that he would make every effort to do that. Commissioner Zanelli requested the City Manager's Weekly Summary Report electronically. Community Development Director Preisendanz said yes. Commissioner Flores stated his concern about the road on Walnut and Lakeshore Drive and would like Public Works to find a long term solution to this problem. He believes the City could have a liability issue if this is not resolved. He also thanked staff for the input that they have given to the Commission regarding the MSHCP. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE q ( OF ---12- PAGE 10 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - APRIL 17, 2007 Commissioner Mendoza thanked Planning Manager Weiner for the explanation regarding Tenant Occupancy. He also explained why he voted no on Item No.3, and voted yes on Item No.5. Chairman O'Neal stated that he did meet with Community Development Director Preisendanz and the meeting was very productive. He also thanked Deputy City Attorney Santana for her help and said staff is doing a great job. ADJOURNMENT ATTEST: ADJOURNED THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, THE MEETING AT 7:36 pm. Respectfully Submitted, Kris Herrington Office Specialist III Rolfe Preisendanz, Director of Community Dev&lopment AGENDA ITEM NO. I PAGE~OF I v MINUTES JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL STUDY SESSION CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 183 NORTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 2007 ......................................................................... CALL TO ORDER - 5:00 P.M. Mayor Magee called the Joint Special Study Session to order at 5:11 p.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: HICKMAN, KELLEY, SCHIFFNER, MAGEE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: BUCKLEY (arrived at 5:13 p.m.) PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: FLORES, GONZALES, MENDOZA, ZANELLI, O'NEAL ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE Also present were: City Manager Brady, City Attorney Leibold, Assistant City Attorney McClendon, Deputy City Attorney Santana, Administrative Services Director Pressey, Community Development Director Preisendanz, Information/Communications Manager Dennis, City Engineer Seumalo, Public Works Manager Payne, Planning Manager Weiner, Associate Planner Donahoe and City Clerk Ray. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Development Review Community Development Director Preisendanz presented the Development Review Process and Environmental Procedure relative to the City of Lake Elsinore's Community Development Department. He commented on each step taken when an application is submitted for approval from the Planning Commission and/or City Council. He commented on the goal of the Community Development Department. He noted that communication is key throughout the process and to being committed to addressing environmental implications of projects early in the process to avoid any issues later on. 1 ACENDA ITEr.~ NO. PACE I d or- iQ_ B. Environmental Processes (CEQA and MSHCP Implementation) Community Development Director Preisendanz presented the Environmental Processing for Development. He commented on each major component involved in the process. He cbmmented on the MSHCP analysis and benefits. He stated that the Determination of Biological Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DB ESP) could be addressed during the CEQA process. He commented on the MSHCP being the largest plan in the nation covering 1.26 million acres. Mayor Magee recognized the Executive Director of the RCA, Tom Mullen. He stated that through Mr. Mullen's vision, the MSHCP was brought together. Mr. Mullen complimented Community Development Director Preisendanz on his presentation. He commented on the National Environmental Protection Act and California Environmental Quality Act. He indicated that he was working with the Army Corps. Of Engineers in an attempt to come up with a clearer and more streamlined process that will accomplish what they believe to be the point with the MSHCP. He indicated that he recognized the jury was still out with the before mentioned. He believed that the exclusive reason for the MSHCP was to accelerate the placement of infrastructure. He commented on the traffic on surrounding highways and that prior to MSHCP, there were many environmental issues. Dennis Fahey commented on the City purchasing a number of lots on Lakeshore Drive for a deflated price. He commented on the value of the land increasing as one gets further away from the lake. Tom Tomlinson of Castle and Cooke, commented on the presentation. He indicated he was confused with the direction of the process. He expressed his concerns with the City's CEQA process as it related to development. He indicated that the process was hard from a developer's standpoint since they start the process fairly early in the design of the development. They try to coordinate the environmental concerns where they anticipate problem areas as they go through the development. He said that he had never been fond of preparing a lot of engineering or hopeful expectations on the side of a developer, only to find out through a CEQA process or an Environmental Review at a later date - which some of things can be done and other things should not be done. He indicated that he was a little confused with where the process was going and his understanding was that there was no change in the implementation of the City Policy. He indicated that he and his company have enjoyed working with the City. He said that his company had not done a lot through the MSHCP in their processes. He said the experiences that they have had, have not been favorable. He said one of the issues had to do with a transportation element that was an exempted design infrastructure development on Nichols Road. He expressed his concern with the time it took to get through the process with the City LEAPS and CEQA. He claimed that if the project was not subject to the 2 AGENDA ITEM NO. Pt'\GE d- )- m:.-J 0 MSHCP, the road would be open by now. He noted that what he heard during the presentation sounded very good and he would like to see it help infrastructure and circulation elements. Jim Good, Attorney for Gresham Savage Law Firm, indicated he was representing MCA in Corona which is a tile making company. He said MCA owned a clay and aggregate mineral property to the north of Nichols Road on the east side of the 1-15. He indicated that he had a very keen interest in the process because MCA would be submitting an application for a mining project which would lead to development for future commercial use. He said they were most interested in the CEQA process. He noted that he did not know the history of how the CEQA process had been handled. He indicated he was a mining attorney and did not have a good handle on that kind of information. He indicated that from a mining perspective, and where he has worked in various counties and agencies, the process that had worked most efficiently for most mining projects had been where the lead agency will accept a draft Environmental Impact Report prepared by a consultant hired by the mining applicant. He said that the draft had to be independently reviewed by the city or lead agency. He said the process had been very efficient in regard to time and money. He said when he reviewed the City's Policy that was adopted in 2000, he was unclear to exactly what was meant. He indicated that one section of the policy referred to the City having a contract prepared directly by their own contractor. He said further on in the policy, it stated that before using a draft prepared by another person, the lead agency shall subject the draft to the agency's own review and analysis. He said to him, this meant that the draft had been prepared for the City under contract or that the draft had been submitted to the City as a proposed EIR. He noted that he reviewed how the policy fit into State Guidelines 15084. He said State Guideline indicated that any person, including the applicant, may submit information or comments to the lead agency to assist in the preparation of a draft EIR and that the submittal may be presented in any format, including the form of a draft EIR. He further noted that the State Guideline stated that the lead agency must consider all information and comments received and that the lead agency may chose anyone of the following arrangements or combination for preparing a draft EIR which include 1) preparing the draft EIR directly with the agency's own staff; 2) contracting with another entity; 3) accepting a draft prepared by the applicant, a consultant retained by the applicant or any other person; or 4) executing a third-party contract or MOU with the applicant to govern the preparation of a draft EIR by an independent contractor. He said he was looking for some understanding. He inquired if it would still be acceptable policy, on part of the City, to allow an applicant to pay for all the technical studies, prepare a draft, submit it to the City staff and have the City conduct an independent review. He said he would like to see some policy direction given along that line. Mayor Magee requested that City Attorney Leibold comment on the policy for third party contracts and how they are handled. 3 AGENDA ITEr.~ NO. PAGE ~ ;)- OF _I 0 City Attorney Leibold commented that the City's practice required that the City contract with a CEQA consultant. She indicated that it had been the practice of the City guidelines since 2000. She stated there was no recommendation for any change and the policy is consistent with the CEQA statutory law. Chairman O'Neal commented on the State CEQA guidelines in the handout specific to Item No.4. He said it was interesting that in the language that is used, which stated "it shall be prepared directly by or on third party contract". He said there was no mention that there are two other ways that it could be prepared. He said he was referring to Section D of 15084, specific to Items Nos. 2 and 3 of the handout. He indicated Item Nos. 2 and 3 in Section D were not mentioned in the City's Policy and that is where he felt the confusion came in. He stated he felt Item No. 3 deals directly with the applicant hiring their own consultant. Assistant City Attorney McClendon commented on a split of authority. He commented on a case out of the second district Court of Appeals which stood for the proposition that a draft EIR can be accepted from the project applicant and reviewed by the agency. He commented that the controlling authority for the City's jurisdiction came from a case out of Redlands in 1999 which stated that regardless of whether the applicant hires the City's consultant or their own, in either event - the City has a contract with that consultant. He stated regardless of whether the applicant's consultant is used or the City's consultant, there should be a contract in order to comply with the literal language of 21082.1A. Scott Thayer of Castle & Cooke, commented on the hiring of consultants and the challenges high profile commercial development presents. He inquired who would withstand the funding of those challenges. He said from his perspective, he would like the opportunity to select the consultant and hire them with the review of the City. He said if something went wrong, he would indemnify the City and pay for those challenges. He commented on LEAPS and inquired what would happen if the process broke down. Mayor Magee inquired on the process for choosing consultants. He made reference to the City's list of approved environmental consultants and indicated that number one on the City's list was Castle & Cooke's consultant. He inquired if there is ever an instance where the City arbitrarily selects a consultant. Community Development Director Preisendanz explained the process for choosing a consultant. He stated it was normal procedure to consult with the applicant and ask the applicant what consultant they have used in the past. He stated if the consultant was on the City's list, then staff would be more than happy to go forward with the applicant's request. 4 AGENDf'\ iTErj NO. d- PACE-LOF_L~ Heidi McBroom of Corman Leigh Communities, commented on the inconsistencies with planners on different projects. Jim Good commented on Assistant City Attorney McClendon's comments regarding the guidelines. He said he was well aware of the Redlands case. He further indicated that the guidelines were still considered law. He indicated that he felt the guidelines allow the City to provide for an alternative method regarding the preparation of a draft EIR. He urged that the policy be amended to provide the flexibility to follow the alternative CEQA preparation approaches. Hardy Strozier of Castle and Cooke, commented on the MSHCP and CEQA policy. He said he has been working in the community since the early 1980's. He believed that the MSHCP is currently adopted by the Council but not being implemented according to the Council MSHCP Policy. He said staff currently interprets the MSHCP based on county staff and county consultants. He said Council instructed staff in 2004 to plan for conservation of City land in the lower end of the acreage. He said that Council also instructed staff to balance conservation with economic development. He said the City encouraged sound planning, and to let the private market place drive the development according to the General Plan. He indicated in one instance, the staff and City Attorney have argued the county's position very forcefully to require land dedication when Castle & Cooke had two of their Senior Biologists interpret that the MSHCP did not require dedication of MSHCP land. He said they have recently shown that the MSHCP baseline biology underlies the entire MSHCP. He indicated the county, many times, are in error with regards to the habitat. He said the county's staff position is to make determinations based on baseline biology in the MSHCP and not withstanding what is actually in the field. They say that the field biology does not prevail over what is written in the MSHCP. He expressed his concern and that of the other developers and said that the City needs a policy to correct that. Mr. Strozier said that the county's implementing approach meant that even if the MSHCP conservation attributes reflected in the MSHCP cell, if that cannot be met because of incorrect biology, the county would still want conservation of the amount of land described in the cell despite the biology facts. He said the county was after the numbers and not after the biology and how animals can survive. He said the county had modified their cells in linkage descriptions in Horsethief Canyon by board policy and declined to follow strict MSHCP modification procedures. He indicated staff has also interpreted the MSHCP as requiring the 1,374 acre Pacific Clay property, excluded by the MSHCP in mitigation, to have the former acreage be made up or transferred elsewhere in adjacent land and cities. Mr. Strozier believes that the City Council should prepare a new set of policy guidelines for staff and land owners to follow in the implementation and interpretation of the MSHCP. 5 l\GEiJDl\ ITEri] NO. PAGE 5 d-- OF (0 Mr. Strozier said he was a lawyer and a planner. He said he agreed with Mr. Good in the sense that the State Guidelines are controlling. He said that the La Vina case clarified the State Guidelines. He recited Page 5 of the State Guidelines, which read "before using a draft prepared by another person, the lead agency shall subject the draft of the agency's own review and analysis. The draft EIR which is sent out for public review must reflect the independent judgment of the lead agency". He indicated if staff were to take on any other approach, he would guarantee that the City would have maximum management overload. He said the process that the City has been using, to allow the landowner to prepare the EIR, is a tried and true process. Commissioner Flores commented on the third party necessities and indicated that he would like to review the contract. He inquired if there had ever been an instance where a third party was not required. Community Development Director Preisendanz commented that, since he started with the City, a third party contract had always been required for CEQA document preparation unless it was exempt. Commissioner Flores inquired if there was another solution without a third party. Community Development Director Preisendanz indicated that his guidance came from the City Manager and the City Attorney because of the legal implications. He noted he would defer any legal advice to be given by the City Attorney. Councilmember Buckley commented on the third-party issue. He stated that a CEQA document is a City document. He stated there had to be trust in the liability of the people preparing the CEQA documents. He stated the last 45 minutes of the conversation has been talking about issues that impacts very, very, very few people. Assistant City Attorney McClendon commented that the City policy is a sound policy. He stated the policy avoids the appearance of impropriety or collusion which was something that the presiding justice in the dissent of the La Vina case very eloquently spoke on. City Attorney Leibold stated that it was their interpretation, based on the appellant court's decision governing the district, the rule is that the City needed to be the contracting entity. She indicated that the City would ultimately be the one to enter into contract on the matter of control and accountability. Council member Buckley stated the City never forced a developer to pick a particular consultant. 6 AGENDP\ m:f.~ NO. PAGE <.0 ~ Or- I D City Attorney Leibold confirmed that, to her knowledge, the City had never forced a consultant unwillingly upon a developer. Mayor Pro Tern Hickman commented that a consultant can apply to the City to be added to the list of consultants. He commented on Pacific Clay and the 1,400 acres that the City was supposed to make up. He further commented on the 1-15 and if the City was responsible for making up those acres for MSHCP. Community Development Director deferred to RCA consultant Joe Monaco. Joe Monaco, consultant to Regional Conservation Authority, commented that relative to the Pacific Clay properties and the settlement agreement in general, there was no specific requirement to provide an acre-for-acre replacement of those lands. He said the MSHCP is a habitat based plan. He said that the conservation estimates for the 146 covered species is based on a certain reserve design that anticipated certain levels of conservation in specific areas. He stated there are circumstances where they can not achieve the levels that were estimated for which the permit was based on and they needed to demonstrate that they have conservation for 146 species. He said they were currently in the process of evaluating the effects of the Settlement Agreement Properties and other actions and entitlements that were issued prior to adoption of the MSHCP. He said that there may be some additional acreage requirements. He said that those additional requirements may or may not be within the City of Lake Elsinore. He said that they expect to have some preliminary estimates in the coming weeks. Councilmember Buckley asked since Pacific Clay is exempt, was it possible that the rest of the City will have to make up for what Pacific Clay does not do because they kept themselves out of the plan. Joe Monaco stated that was not correct. The City did not have to make up for what Pacific Clay does not do. City Manager Brady stated that staff had never stated that the 1,374 acres needed to be replaced. Community Development Director Preisendanz confirmed that no one was ever told that there was acreage to make up. Mayor Pro Tern Hickman inquired when an applicant would manually be able to check on the progress of the project. Community Development Director Preisendanz stated when projects first come in, they are issued a number. He indicated that it took a lot of time to evaluate which planner was going to get which project. He stated that the 7 ~TEFi~ iJO. d- PAGE -, OF (C) City was currently preparing the process to use the Navaline System. He stated that at some point in the near future, it would be computerized. He stated that currently the projects are logged into a book and also put into a computer application. Council member Schiffner commented on the selection of consultants and the need to be particular about the selection. Council member Kelley thanked the Planning Department for their thorough presentation. She stated that she had never been fond of the MSHCP and she had voted no for the MSHCP because she felt Lake Elsinore became a huge land bank for everyone else. She stated the City of Lake Elsinore gave up more acreage than other areas did. She stated she felt the science was not exact. She commented that Lake Elsinore was unfairly targeted with a lot of extra land. She inquired if projects were moving through RCA in a timely manner. Community Development Director Preisendanz responded the process was moving through in a timely manner. He stated that Environmental Planner Wendy Worthy was involved with working on CEQA and the MSHCP. Council member Kelley expressed her concerns with inconsistencies between planners. Community Development Director Preisendanz replied the inconsistencies that Council member Kelley was referring to, had to do with the incompleteness letters within the first 30 days. He stated that the City had 30 days to deem the project complete or incomplete. He indicated that in the past, there were incompleteness items added with the design review comments. He stated that currently, in order to get more complete plans, all planners have been instructed to prepare an incomplete letter within the 30 days and also provide design comments up front. Mayor Magee commented on Mr. Strozier's statement regarding the implementation of the MSHCP being inconsistent with Council direction. He noted that he remembered specifically that the City did want to err on the side of economic development. He noted his disappointment with Mr. Monaco's comments regarding the 1,300 acres. He indicated the City had three years to try and figure it out. He indicated that the City needed to know the exact number. He called upon the RCA to help the City get to their required MSHCP conservation acreage as soon as possible. Mayor Magee stated the City was to have the final say if there was an interpretation issue. He stated the challenge from the development community has conveyed that City staff had not been aggressive enough in disagreeing with the RCA's interpretation. 8 frlGEr~Df-\ jTE~-jJ "~o. d- PAGE e OF -.J 0 Community Development Director Preisendanz responded the Planning Department had reviewed the JPR process in light of the Implementation Agreement. He noted that the Planning Department's understanding of the Implementation Agreement was that, through the JPR, Findings of Consistency would come through the RCA. He stated there were some cases where there would be a balance of development and conservation. He noted that he did not let the RCA dictate to the City what is right and what is wrong. Mayor Magee commented that he would like to see things move forward rather than languishing and if there is a dispute, he would like it to be brought forward to the Council to make the decision, even if the recommendation is one of denial, he would like it brought forward along with the facts and to get it into the public hearing process. He expressed his concern regarding the comment about field biology being inconsistent with what is identified on the MSHCP. He commented that he verified information shared with him by Mr. Strozier and was disturbed by the findings. He noted that the MSHCP calls it one thing and the actual flora and fauna in the area is different. He stated that the City needs a policy change for these inconsistencies. Joe Monaco of ReA, commented on the vegetation map being updated and that the vegetation database layer that was used in the MSHCP is not accurate and does not reflect what is on the ground. He said the California Department of Fish and Game recently updated the vegetation mapping, which gave them a more current database to work off with. He said there has not been a comprehensive comparison plan area wide of differences, such as naming conventions used in the classification system. He said the updated vegetation map is not substantially different from the map used to prepare the MSHCP. Mayor Magee questioned City Attorney Leibold regarding amending the City's policy. City Attorney Leibold stated that the process is outlined in MSHCP as criteria refinement. Mayor Magee commented that since the City is the single largest incorporated contributor to the MSHCP, the RCA should grant the City priority processing. Mayor Magee noted Executive Director Mullen nodding in agreement. Councilmember Schiffner commented that any of the problems found in the system should be brought to the Council's attention and he would be happy to take the problems to the RCA Board. 9 AGE!'(D;~ nt.',~ iJO. d- PACE q OF I 0 Mayor Magee stated with respect to the third party contract issue, the only policy change being suggested by the development community, that he has heard, was from the development community and not from the City's Attorneys, staff or City Council. Mayor Magee indicated he has heard from Council was to keep projects moving forward even if it meant a recommendation for denial, review for consistency, continue to be consistent with existing Council Policy, and when evaluating a project, continue to foster economic development. City Manager Brady stated he wanted to assure the City Council and the development community that staff was very aware of the need for economic development and providing for the needs, goods, services and requirements of the community; and providing the funds necessary to provide other programs that the City needs. Mayor Magee thanked everyone for their attendance and for being involved in the discussion. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. ADJOURNMENT The Joint City Council/Planning Commission Study S p.m. adjourned at 7:00 MICHAEL O'NEAL, CHAIRMAN PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: \ fD0hOL ~ l\ifiCHELLE SOTO INTERIM CITY CLERK 10 AGi:NDr" ITEf:~ NO. C7- PAceJ 0 OF~ CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION TO: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OCTOBER 16, 2007 MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF A SINGLE-STORY SINGLE- FAMILY DWELLING UNIT LOCATED AT 17002 ROSE AVENUE (APN'S: 375-034-034, 035, 036 & 037) PRISMA PLANS, ATTN: ROGELlO SANCHEZ, 5873 VAL VISTA PLACE, RIVERSIDE, CA 92504 ROBERTO ROSALES, 35265 BILLIE ANN ROAD, WILDOMAR, CA 92595 DATE: PROJECT TITLE: APPLICANT: OWNER: PROJECT REQUEST The applicant is requesting design review consideration of a 4,820 square-foot, single-story conventionally built single-family dwelling located at 17002 Rose Avenue (APN's: 375-034- 035, 036 & 037). Review is pursuant to Chapter 17.24 (R-2 Medium Density Residential), Chapter 17.23 (R-1, Single-Family Residential), Chapter 17.82 (Design Review), Chapter 17.14 (Residential Development Standards), and Chapter 17.66 (Parking Requirements) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). BACKGROUND The Design Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the plans for the proposed single-family dwelling and provided several substantive comments on the proposed architectural design, setbacks and fencing. Once revised, the applicant re-submitted plans along with building elevations which incorporated the recommendations that were suggested by the DRC. WATER AVAilABILITY IFIRE FLOW ISSUES The applicant provided staff with a detailed "Water Will Serve" Request Checklist from the Elsinore Water District (EWD). The agency indicates that an eight inch (8") water line extension must be provided by the property owner approximately four-hundred and eighty Iinear- feet (480') from Robertson Street across Riverside Drive. The Water District also states that while the existing "Fire Flow" is not adequate to serve the proposed residence at the current time, the pressure and fire flow will be sufficient once the 8-inch water line extension is installed, Le. 500 gallons per minute for a two hour duration at 20 psi (see Attachment No.4). Consequently, the applicant shall be required to provide a fire hydrant adjacent to the project site at the same time the water line extension is installed. With regard to sewer service, an existing sewer line currently exists approximate~~~~el1-h~ftY. PACE ( '3 OF 37 REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING LOCATED AT 17002 ROSE AVENUE (APN'S: 375-034-035, 036 & 037) from the subject property within Illinois Street. Accordingly, the property owner shall be required to extend the existing sewer line to the property prior to issuance of building permit. PROJECT LOCATION The project site consists offour (4) separate vacant lots generally located on the east side of Rose Avenue approximately 100 linear-feet south of the Illinois Street. Furthermore, the project site is located within the R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District and has a General Plan designation of Future Specific Plan J (Country Club Heights #1). The Lake Elsinore Municipal Code allows for single-family homes in the R-2 zone subject to compliance with R-1 zone standards. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Project Sites Vacant R-2 (Medium Density Specific Plan J Residential North Residential R-2 (Medium Density Specific Plan J Residential South Commercial R-2 (Medium Density Specific Plan J Residential East Vacant R-2 (Medium Density Specific Plan J Residential West Vacant R-2 (Medium Density Specific Plan J Residential PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is requesting design review consideration for the design and establishment of a conventionally built single-story, single-family dwelling. The 3,638 square-foot floor plan will include four (4) bedrooms, three (3) bathrooms, family room, dining room, living room and an entry foyer. Sitinq The proposed single-family dwelling will be located on a relatively hilly site. The residence will be placed on top of the hill at the rear of the property, one-hundred and seventy feet (170') back from the Rose Avenue frontage. An liS-curved" driveway with a maximum fifteen percent (15%) grade will provide access to the three (3) car garage which faces the AGENDA ITEM -3 PAGE~OF3( REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING LOCATED AT 17002 ROSE AVENUE (APN'S: 375-034-035, 036 & 037) side or north property line. A twenty-five foot wide rear yard is proposed, which will include a swimming pool located at the southwest corner of the site. The project site is currently divided into four legal lots. A condition of approval has been added requiring that a lot merger application be submitted and approved by the Engineering Department prior to issuance of building permit. Architecture The applicant is proposing a Spanish/Mediterranean style architecture for the proposed single-family dwelling. A Santa Barbara Mission tile roof is proposed for the residence. The north (front) elevation will include a dramatic front entry porch with arched sides and decorative double doors with an arched window above. Other windows on the elevation will receive arched decorative surrounds. Windows on the north elevation which face the street frontage, will also receive the decorative surround treatments. The rear south elevation will also have arched elements along the covered patio. A variety of decorative materials will also be utilized including decorative chimney caps, wrought iron accents and a formed stucco cornice. Landscapinq The proposed landscaping plan indicates that three 24-inch box street trees will be provided along the Rose Avenue frontage. In addition, eight (8) Queen Palms will abut the S-curved driveway as it transcends up to the residence. Four (4) different bands of groundcover plantings will be provided in the front yard along with pockets of accent shrubs and foundation plantings including Bird of Paradise, Lavender, Indian Hawthorn and Fountain Grass which will all serve to further compliment the Mediterranean architectural style of the residence. Walls & Fencinq The applicant is proposing a six-foot (6') tall block wall around the rear portion of the property. A three-foot tall block wall is proposed from the street frontage back approximately sixty feet (60') along the side property lines. Decorative columns will be provided every twenty-five (25') feet on center to add further interest. A decorative low wrought iron courtyard wall will also be provided on each side of the main entrance into the residence. AGENDA ITEM '3 PAGE~OFKI REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING LOCATED AT 17002 ROSE AVENUE (APN'S: 375-034-035, 036 & 037) Color and Materials Roof Wall Santa Barbara Mission 'S"-tiIe Adobe Brown Stucco Sherwin Williams SW 6113 "Interactive Cream" Sherwin Williams SW 6080 "Likeable Sand" Fascia Board Molding ANAL YSIS Staff has reviewed the proposed single-family dwelling and has found that with the attached conditions of approval, the project meets all minimum requirements of Chapter 17.82 (Design Review), Chapter 17.14 (Residential Development Standards), Chapter 17.23 (Single-family Residential), and Chapter 17.66 (Parking Requirements) of the lake Elsinore Municipal Code (lEMC) including but not limited to; density, setbacks, landscaping, parking, and lot coverage. Siting The total building footprint for the proposed dwelling unit is 4,820 square feet which includes the proposed garage floor, living area, patio and porch. The proposed building coverage constitutes seventeen (17%) of the overall lot size, well below the maximum allowed lot coverage of fifty percent (50%) as outlined in Chapter 17.23.090 of the lEMC. In addition, the site plan complies with all applicable development standards and criteria outlined in the R-1 (Single-Family Residential) Zoning District and the Residential Development Standards outlined in the lEMC. Architecture The proposed Spanish/Mediterranean architecture of the dwelling unit is consistent with the style and design of existing single-family dwelling units within Country Club Heights. Furthermore, the proposed colors and materials to be incorporated are consistent with the goals and intent of the architectural design guidelines of the General Plan's Community Design Element, in that the proposed residence provides an aesthetic quality that lends to the overall achievement of a well balanced residential zoning district. Landscapinq The minimum landscape coverage requirements for in-fill single-family dwelling unit's AGENDA ITEM 3 PAGE ~ OF"I.7 REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING LOCATED AT 17002 ROSE AVENUE (APN'S: 375-034-035, 036 & 037) states that the applicant landscape the front-yard with an automatic irrigation system as outlined in Chapter 17.14 (Residential Development Standards). The applicant has met this requirement by proposing a fully landscaped, automatically irrigated front yard. Furthermore the applicant is proposing to incorporate a rain sensor which will assist in the conservation of water. It should also be noted that the applicant is proposing to irrigate and landscape all slopes greater than five feet (5') in height. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Staff determined that the Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Pub. Res. Code SS 21000 et seq.: "CEQA") and the CEQA Guidelines (14 C.C.R. SS 15000 et seq.) pursuant to a class 3(a) exemption for new construction or conversion of small structures because the Project involves construction of one single- family residence. (14 C.C.R. S 15303(a)). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2007-_ approving the proposed single-family dwelling unit located at 17002 Rose Avenue based on the Findings, Exhibits, and the proposed Conditions of Approval. PREPARED BY: MATTHEW C. HARRIS, SENIOR PLANNER APPROVED BY: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ fVJ/lA .--- DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT I' f , / r.--r ATTACHMENTS: 1. VICINITY MAP 2. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 3. PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 4. WATER WILL SERVE LETTER REQUEST CHECKLIST 5. CEQA-NOTICE OF EXEMPTION 6. SITE PLAN 7. GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN 8. FLOOR PLAN 9. ELEVATIONS 10. ROOF PLAN 11. SECTION PLAN FULL SIZE SET OF PLANS AGENDA .!):EM :l PAGE -S- OF 3-7 VICINITY MAP MINOR DESIGN REVIEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE \--~ \?b ----- \.~ .--.-------- \t, R\~. S\ .---- \~ ---------. \ ~ -_.-~--- ~' .....- -.... #'>'// ~""./.,., / \ ~ \ PROJECT SITE \ S~ \ ~- \ -- \ --------- /\- -------- \'i'O\S?':// '\ \\.-'-:// /// /'" \, \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \<'0 . \~~ <Jl,A ,"'7L \~ \ \ \ \\ / I PLANNING COMMISSION 10/16/2007 ACENDA ITEM NO. 3 PACE~ ~ OF 37 RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A MINOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A CONVENTIONALLY BUILT, SINGLE STORY, SINGLE- FAMILY DWELLING UNIT LOCATED AT 17002 ROSE AVENUE WHEREAS, Rogelio Sanchez, Prisma Plans, filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore requesting approval of a Minor Design Review for a conventionally built, single-story, single-family dwelling unit with an attached three (3) car garage (the "Project") on property located at 17002 Rose Avenue (APN'S: 375-034-035, 036 & 037); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of considering and approving, conditionally approving, or denying Minor Design Review requests for residential projects; and WHEREAS, public notice of the Project has been given and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public meeting held with respect to this item on October 16, 2007. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the proposed design for the Project and has found it acceptable. The Planning Commission finds and determines that the Project is consistent with the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. SECTION 2. The Planning Commission finds and determines that the Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Pub. Res. Code SS 21000 et seq.: "CEQA") and the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (14 C.C.R. SS 15000 et seq.: the "CEQA Guidelines") pursuant to a class 3(a) exemption for new construction or conversion of small structures because the Project involves construction of one single-family residence. (CEQA Guidelines S 15303(a)). SECTION 3. That in accordance with Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Chapter 17.82, the Planning Commission makes the following findings for the approval of the Project: 1. The Project, as approved, will comply with the goals and objectives of the intended General Plan and the Zoning District in which the Project will be located. The Project complies with the goals and objectives of General Plan designation Specific Plan J (Country Club Heights No.1) as well as the R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District. General Plan designation Specific Plan J is intended to provide a wide range of housing densities and some limited commercial and AGEND.?\ lTErJi NO.. 3 PACE, '7 n.OF '37 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE 2 OF 4 industrial uses. Furthermore, Table 111-5 (General Plan/Zoning Compatibility Matrix) within the General Plan identifies that the General Plan designation Future Specific Plan J (Country Club Heights No.1) is compatible with the R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District. In addition, Future Specific Plan J General Plan designation mandates that the average residential density will be 6 dwelling units to the net acre. The proposed single-family dwelling unit will cover approximately seventeen percent (17%) of the net lot area, which complies with the goals and objectives of the Future Specific Plan J designation of the General Plan, R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District, and the General Plan/Zoning Compatibility Matrix. Approval of this Project will assist in achieving the development of a well balanced and functional mix of residential, limited commercial, limited industrial, open space, recreational and institutional land uses by providing additional affordable housing within the R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District. The Project also encourages the development and maintenance of a broad range of housing types for all income groups and age categories. Finally, the Project, which incorporates elements of "Spanish/Mediterranean" style architecture, will provide a well rounded design while maintaining the desirable rural characteristics and base framework to achieve quality and compatibility in the physical design of the developing portions of the City. Overall, the Project will enhance the existing developed areas within General Plan designation Future Specific Plan J and Zoning Designation R-2 (Medium Density Residential) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. 2. The Project complies with the design directives contained in Section 17.82.060 and all other applicable provisions of the Municipal Code. The Project is appropriate to the site and surrounding developments in that the proposed single-family dwelling unit, after meeting applicable conditions of approval, will have: an approximate one-hundred fifty-three foot nine inch (153'- 9" front-yard setback; sufficient front, side, and rear-yard landscaping; and, safe and sufficient on-site vehicular circulation. In addition, and after meeting all applied conditions of approval, the Project will comply with all setback, height, and lot coverage requirements as outlined in the R-1 (Single-Family Residential) Zoning District as mandated by the R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. The Project will complement the quality of existing projects in that the applicant is providing elements of "Spanish/Mediterranean" style architecture, which includes: 360-degree architecture articulation pursuant to the "General Plan, Community Design Element Design Guidelines"; windows with surrounds; decorative wrought iron elements; decorative chimney caps; and a red concrete tile roof. 3. Subject to the attached conditions of approval, the Project is not anticipated to result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 PACE ~ OF "3 7 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE30F4 - A Class 3 CEQA exemption may be invoked when the development proposal involves construction of one single family residence. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15303(a), the Project is exempt from environmental review because it involves the construction of one single family residence. Section 7.3.2 of the MSHCP states that: 'Tdjevelopment of individual single-family homes on existing parcels, in accordance with existing land use regulations is a Covered Activity within the Criteria Area," subject to an expedited review process. Impacts of development of single-family residences on sensitive habitat and covered species were accounted for in the MSHCP and the MSHCP EIR. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the single-family residence at 17002 Rose A venue (APN: 375-034-035, 036 & 037) was sited on the least sensitive portion of the lot. Consideration was given to access, topography/terrain, zoning standards including setbacks, soil types, presence of earthquake fault lines, leach fields, presence of oak trees and high fire hazard areas. The building foot print area is appropriate and complies with the MSHCP Criteria Area. Moreover, the Project has been reviewed by all City divisions and departments, which have imposed certain conditions of approval on the Project to ensure that no adverse impacts occur including requirements for adequate water supply and fire suppression infrastructure. In light of those conditions of approval, as well as the design features of the Project itself, the Project will not have a significant effect on the environment. 4. 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 Project to ensure development of the property in accordance with the objectives of Chapter 17.82. Pursuant to Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Section 17.82.070, the Project has been scheduled for consideration and action of the Planning Commission. The Project has also been conditioned to comply with all aspects of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. The Applicant shall meet all required setbacks and development standards pursuant to the R-2 (Medium Density Residential) zoning designation. SECTION 4. Based upon the evidence presented, the above findings, and the conditions of approval, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Minor Design Review application. SECTION 5. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 PACE~ 9 ",oF3i "-- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE 4 OF 4 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of October 2007, by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Michael O'Neal, Chairman City of Lake Elsinore ATTEST: Rolfe Preisendanz Director of Community Development ACENDA ITEM NO. '3 PACE 10 __OF 37 .._ CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PROJECT NAME: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT LOCATED AT 17002 ROSE AVENUE (APN'S: 375-034-034, 035, 036 & 037) PLANNING DIVISION GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. The applicant shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its Officials, Officers, Employees, and Agents from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City, its Officials, Officers, Employees or Agents to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning the Minor Design Review project attached hereto. 2. The decision of the Planning Commission shall be final fifteen (15) days from the date of the decision, unless an appeal has been filed with the City Council pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 17.80 of the lake Elsinore Municipal Code. 3. If the project proposes an outdoor storage tank, the applicant shall locate the unit within the side or rear yards. If location must be within the front yard, the applicant shall provide a method of screening subject to the review and approval of the Director of Community Development or his designee. 4. Minor Design Review approval of a single-family dwelling unit located at 17002 Rose Avenue will lapse and become void upon one (1) year of the approval date unless a building permit is issued and construction commenced and the project is diligently being pursued toward completion. 5. All Conditions of Approval shall be reproduced upon page one of building plans submitted to the Building and Safety Division for Plan Check. 6. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, the applicant shall sign and complete an "Acknowledgement of Conditions," and shall return the executed original to the Community Development Department for inclusion in the case records. 7. All materials and colors depicted on the plans and materials board shall be used unless modified by the Applicant and approved by the Community Development Director or designee. AGENDA Ii'EM NO.__J - PAce.-1l.-0F ~2- 8. All site improvements shall be constructed as indicated on the approved site plan and elevations, with revisions as noted herein. The applicant shall meet all required setbacks, and development standards pursuant to the R-1 (Single- Family Residential) development standards. Any revisions to the Minor Design Review attached hereto shall be processed in a similar manner as the original Minor Design Review. All plans submitted for Building Division plan check shall conform to the submitted plans as modified by the Conditions of Approval. 9. All windows, as shown on the approved elevations, shall use foam surrounds and/or other architectural-type features approved by the Community Development Director or designee. 10. All roofing materials shall have a minimum Class "An Fire rating, and so noted on the construction plans. 11. The Applicant is to meet all applicable City Codes and Ordinances. 12. A cash bond of $1,000.00 shall be required for any construction trailers placed on the site and used during construction. Bonds will be released after removal of trailers and restoration of the site to an acceptable state, subject to the approval of the Community Development Director or designee. 13. The Applicant shall comply with the City's Noise Ordinance. Construction activity shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 AM to 5:00 PM, Monday through Friday, and no construction activity shall occur on Saturdays, Sundays or legal holidays. 14. The 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 control techniques. Interim erosion control measures shall be provided thirty (30) days after the site's rough grading, as approved by the City Engineer. 15. Any exterior air conditioning or other mechanical equipment shall be ground mounted and screened so that they are not visible from neighboring property or public streets. Air conditioning units and related equipment may not encroach more than two-feet (2') into the required minimum side yard setback. 16. Garages shall be constructed to provide a minimum interior clear space of twenty feet (20') x twenty feet (20') for two cars. AGENDA r<-t ...." "") It.:.., Il'iV. / PACE~~ 17. The Applicant shall provide shrubs and plant materials as shown on the landscape plan. Any changes to this plan shall be subject to the approval of the Community Development Director or designee. The landscape plan improvements and plantings shall be fully installed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 18. Planting within fifteen feet (15') of ingress/egress points shall be no higher than 36 inches. 19. Driveways shall be constructed of concrete per Building and Safety Division standards. 20. All walls or fences located in any front yard shall not exceed thirty-six inches (36") in height with the exception that wrought-iron fences may be five feet (5') in height. Chain link fences shall be prohibited. 21. The applicant shall provide a flat concrete pad a minimum of 3'- 0" by 7'- 0" adjacent to each dwelling unit. The storage pad for trash barrels shall be concealed from public view. 22. The applicant shall submit a check in the amount of $64.00 made payable to the County of Riverside for a Notice of Exemption. The check shall be submitted to the Planning Division for processing within 48 hours of the projects approval. 23. The applicant shall place a weatherproof 3' x 3' sign at the entrance to the project site identifying the approved days and hours of construction activity and a statement that complaints regarding the operation can be lodged with the City of Lake Elsinore Code Enforcement Division (951) 674-3124. The sign shall be installed prior to the issuance of a grading permit and/or building permit which ever comes first. 24. All exposed solid walls visible from Rose Avenue or adjacent properties shall utilize a split-face block or be stuccoed to match the main dwelling unit. 25. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Riverside County Fire Department. 26. The applicant is to meet all requirements of Southern California Edison. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS 27. All walls and/or fencing need to be located off the property line and so indicated on the construction plans. If the Applicant proposes to place any walls and/or fencing on the property line he/she must submit a notarized agreement ACENDA iTEM NO. PACE I 3 3 OF 37 between the subject property owner and the adjacent property owner to the Planning Department prior to issuance of a building permit. 28. The applicant shall submit a Lot Merger application to the Engineering Department for review and approval prior to issuance of a Building Permit. 29. The landscaping plan shall be modified to denote the use of an automatic irrigation system throughout the front yard area and the incorporation of a rain sensor. 30. The applicant shall provide assurance that all required fees to the Lake Elsinore Unified School District have been paid prior to issuance of building permits. 31 . The applicant shall pay park-in-Iieu fees in effect at the time prior to issuance of building permits. 32. The applicant shall provide assurances to the Planning Division that all requirements and fees of the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District have been met. 33. The applicant shall pay the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Fee (MSHCP) Local Development Mitigation Fee (fee for density less than 8 du/ac) prior to obtaining building permits. 34. Prior to the issuance of any building permit for the Project, the Developer shall enter into an agreement with the City and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Lake Elsinore to provide (a) 15% of the units constructed in the Project as affordable housing units in accordance with the requirements of Section 33413(b )(2) of the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health & Safety Code Sections 33000 et seq.), or (b) an alternative equivalent action as determined by the City which may include (without limitation) dedication of vacant land, construction of affordable units on another site, or payment of an in-lieu fee at the rate of $2.00 per square-foot of assessable space for each dwelling unit in the Project. For purposes of this condition, "assessable space" means all of the square-footage within the perimeter of a structure, not including any carport, walkway, garage, overhang, patio, enclosed patio, detached accessory structure, or similar area. The amount of the square- footage within the perimeter of a residential structure shall be calculated by the building department of the City in accordance with the standard practice of the City in calculating structural perimeters. 35. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant/Developer shall obtain and submit a "will serve" letter from Elsinore Water District to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. The "will serve" letter shall specifically indicate that an 8" water line extension and fire hydrant have been installed so ACENDA ITEM NO. PACE, / Lf 3 OF_ 3 7 as to achieve a water pressure and fire flow of 50 gallons per minute for a two hour period at 20 psi. 36. The applicant shall pay all applicable Library Capital Improvement Fund fees, prior to the issuance of a building permit. 37. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide assurances to the Community Development Department indicating that the existing sewer line in Illinois Street will be extended to the subject property and will be operable for service. No occupancy will be granted unless such sewer improvements have been installed and are operational. 38. The Applicant/Developer shall show the location of a decorative mailbox structure on the site plan and shall provide a dimensioned detail indicating colors and materials. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICA TE OF OCCUPANCY 39. The Applicant shall plant twenty-four inch (24") box street trees along all street frontages selected from the City Street Tree List, a maximum of thirty feet (30') apart. Planting is subject to the approval of the Community Development Director or designee prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 40. The applicant shall provide an irrigation system for landscaped areas onsite as shown on the landscape plans. The irrigation system shall be fully installed and operational prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 41. The Applicant shall provide a rain sensor as shown on the landscape plan. The rain sensor shall be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 42. All exposed slopes in excess of three feet (3') in height shall have permanent irrigation system and erosion control vegetation installed, as approved by the City's Landscape Architect. A Planting and Irrigation Plan shall be submitted, approved and planted prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Fees are required for review of plans and inspections. 43. The building address shall be a minimum of four inches (4") high and shall be easily visible from the public right-of-way. Care shall be taken to select colors and materials that contrast with building walls or trim. Installation of building address shall be done prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 44. The applicant shall meet all Conditions of Approval prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and release of utilities. ACENDl\ ITi:M riO. '3 PACE_( 5 0-1= ~ 7 ENGINEERING DIVISION GENERAL: 45. All Public Works requirements shall be complied with as a condition of development as specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) prior to building permit. 46. Process and meet all parcel merger requirements prior to building permit issuance. 47. Submit a 'Will Serve" letter to the City Engineering Division from both water agencies stating that water and sewer arrangements have been made for this project and specify the technical data for the water service at the location. such as water pressure and volume etc. Submit this letter prior to applying for a building permit. 48. Submit a "Non Interference Letter" from Southern California Edison prior to issuance of Grading Permit. Edison's contact person is Lisa Salinas at 14799 Chestnut Street, Westminster CA. 92683, and her telephone number is (714) 934-0838. 49. Arrangements for relocation of utility company facilities (power poles, vaults, etc.) out of the roadway or alley shall be the responsibility of the property owner or his agent. 50. Provide fire protection access and facilities as required in writing by Riverside County Fire. 51. In accordance with the City's Franchise Agreement for waste disposal & recycling, the applicant shall be required to contract with CR&R Inc. for removal and disposal of all waste material, debris, vegetation and other rubbish generated during cleaning, demolition, clear and grubbing or all other phases of construction. 52. All grading and street improvement plans submitted to engineering shall be drawn on 24" x 36" Mylar and be set into City's specific border and title block and include city specific general notes for grading or street improvements respectively. Digital files for the border and the notes are available by request to "agutierrez@lake-elsinore.org", 53. Private driveway should be aligned at a 90 degree angle to Rose Avenue center line. AGENDA ITHil NO. 3 PACE, I fa Or- 3 7 DEDICATION: 54. Dedicate a ten-foot slope easement or right of way along Rose Avenue property line for future street alignment prior to issuance of building permit (Res. 87-64). 55. Public right-of-way dedications shall be prepared by the applicant or his agent. Deeds shall be submitted to the Engineering Division for review and approval and recordation prior to issuance of building permit. STREET IMPROVEMENTS 56. Grade a 24 foot wide section and a 20 foot wide pavement section in Rose Avenue (the minimum pavement section shall be 3" Asphalt Concrete over 5" Aggregate Base) and pavement transitions (2.5" AC over compacted native base) per approved street plans (LEMC Title 12). The Rose Avenue improvements shall extend from Illinois Street to the most southerly property line of the merged lots. Plans shall be approved and signed by the City Engineer prior to issuance of building permit (LEMC 16.34). 57. A California Registered Civil Engineer shall prepare street improvement plans and specifications. Improvements shall be designed and constructed to Riverside County Road Department Standards, latest edition, and City Codes (LEMC 12.04 and 16.34). Street improvement plans shall show existing and future profiles at centerline of street, at top of curb. The profiles and contours shall extend to 50' beyond the property limits on Rose Avenue centerline to Riverside Street centerline. 58. If the existing street improvements are to be modified, the existing street plans on file shall be modified accordingly and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of building permit. An encroachment permit will be required to do the work. 59. Work done under an encroachment permit for off-site improvements of utility lines shall be delineated on the street improvement plans and approved and signed by the City Engineer prior to issuance of building permits. 60. Pay all fees and meet requirements of an encroachment permit issued by the Engineering Division for construction of off-site public works improvements (LEMC12.08, Res.83-78). All fees and requirements for an encroachment permit shall be fulfilled before Certificate of Occupancy. t:~CENDl\ I7El','; i~O. 3 PACE. l 7 OF 3 7 GRADING 61. Developer shall obtain all necessary off-site easements for off-site grading from the adjacent property owners prior to issuance of grading permit approval. 62. Apply and obtain a grading permit with appropriate security prior to any grading activity. 63. A grading plan stamped/signed by a California Registered Civil Engineer is required if the sum of the cut and fill in grading exceeds 50 cubic yards and the existing drainage flow pattern is substantially modified as determined by the City Engineer. The grading plan shall show volumes of cut and fill, adequate contours and/or spot elevations of the existing ground as surveyed by a licensed surveyor or civil engineer. Contours shall extend to minimum of 15 feet beyond property lines to indicate existing drainage pattern. Apply and obtain a grading permit with appropriate security prior to grading permit issuance. 64. Provide soils, geology and seismic report, as part of this report address the requirement of the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. Provide final soils report showing compliance with recommendations. 65. Applicant to provide erosion control measures as part of their grading plan. The applicant shall contribute to protection of storm water quality and meet the goals of the BMP in Supplement "A" in the Riverside County NPDES Drainage Area Management Plan. 66. All grading shall be done under the supervision of a geotechnical engineer and he shall certify all slopes steeper than 2 to 1 for stability and proper erosion control. DRAINAGE: 67. On-site drainage shall be conveyed to a public facility, accepted by adjacent property owners by a notarized letter of drainage acceptance, or conveyed to a drainage easement. 68. All natural drainage traversing the site shall be conveyed through the site, or shall be collected and conveyed by a method approved by the City Engineer. 69. Roof drains shall not be allowed to outlet directly through coring in the street curb. Roofs shall drain to a landscaped area. Driveways shall be sloped to drain into landscaping prior to entering street facilities. 70. Submit, along with grading plans, Hydrology and Hydraulic Reports for review and approval by City Engineer. Developer shall mitigate any flooding and/or AGENDj1I-I"';F,~ efO ? , Iir..~~: a~" . 2 PACE_ {~ ,OF '3-; erosion downstream caused by development of the site and/or diversion of drainage. FEES: 71. Pay all Capital Improvement and Plan Check fees (LEMC 16.34). The current traffic mitigation fee is $1,369.00; the current drainage fee is $3,285.00 (Riverside Drive South Dist.) and the current TUMF amount is $9,693.00; the amount of fees shall be adiusted accordinq to the fee schedule current at the time of payment. STORMWA TER! CLEANWA TER PROTECTION PROGRAM 72. City of Lake Elsinore has adopted ordinances for storm water management and discharge control. In accordance with state and federal law, these local storm water ordinances prohibit the discharge of waste into storm drain system or local surface waters. This includes non-storm water discharges containing oil, grease, detergents, trash, or other waste remains. Brochures of "Storm water Pollution, What You Should Know" describing preventing measures are available at City Hall. PLEASE NOTE: The discharge of pollutants into street, gutters, storm drain system, or waterways -without Regional Water Quality Control Board permit or waver - is strictly prohibited by local ordinances and state and federal law. AC"1\'~'r\ !T~"" 1\ ~ ' C~~~r'\ ~ ' ~f~'t i-J()$ ./ PACE,_ {9 . .~ OF_.5 7 ... ELSINORE WA TER DISTRICT WA TER WILL SERVE LETTER REQUEST CHECKLIST 6-06-07 Roberto Rosales 20085 Plessner Way YfI~onuu.Ca.92595 Roberto Rosales \Account # Owner's Phone # 951-265-6493 Date of Request Owner's Name Mailing Address City/State/Zip Contact Name Track/Lot/Block Street Address Type of Request Residential X New Construction Contacfs Phone # APN# 951-265-6493 375-034-035.036.037 Rose Avenue Commercial Other Type X Remodel Received: Date Initials Comments Grant Deed Preliminary Title Report Plans of Addition (Remodels Only) Payment Check # Date Field Check: Remodels: Size of Main Line JL Location of Main Line To be installed in Street Served by Hydro Tank NO Within Easement Zone Backflow Device Needed Tvee Static water pressure less than 45 psi Static water pressure greater than 90 psi Meter Size Location Customer Shut Off Fire Service Street Lateral Size & Materials Building Lateral Size & Materials Engineering Date Sent Prepared By: 6-21-07 Date Approved by Engineering Approved By: Date C-"t. ( -Or 7-2--0, FINAL WILL-SERVE LETTER ISSUANCE: Date Preoared Date to Customer YfI11 Serve Issued ,- t. - 0'1 {- 2- - 07 Conditions of Will-Serve, if applicable: This )Vi' I reauire an 8" line extension aooroximatelv 480' in lenath from Robertson S1. continuina across Riv.,-side Dr. ACENOA ITEM NO. 3 PACE. dO ~ m:. '3 7. ~~ FORM B Page 1 Name APN Roberto Rosales 375-034-035.036.037 PUBLIC WATER SERVICE CERTIFICATION This certifies that the above referenced property is within the service area boundaries of this water service utility and that: Service Infonnation: (Check one) There are currently existing adequate source, storage and distribution line capacities to provide potable water to the referenced site in sufficient quantities to satisfy the domestic water service and fire protection requirements of the proposed use. The water mains to serve each proposed service connection are currently installed and operable. Financial arrangements have been made to install water mains for each proposed service outlet and any other necessary facilities to insure that the proposed use will have adequate source, storage and distribution line capacities for each proposed service connection that will satisfy the domestic water service and fire protection requirements of the proposed use. X It is financially and physically feasible to install water service facilities that will provide adequate source, storage and distribution line capacities for each proposed service connection that will satisfy the domestic water service and fire protection requirements of the proposed use. Easement Infonnation: (Check one) X This agency has no known water lines or easements on the subject property line. This agency has water lines and/or easements on the subject property but they do not conflict with the proposed use as currently designed. This agency has waterlines and/or easements on the subject property which conflict with the proposed project as currently designed. Applicant must revise plans and resubmit them to this agency for approval. ~ ~ Gallons per minute at 20 pounds per square inch for a minimum two-hour duration. A above referenced parcel. hydrant is located feet from the As shown on the hydraulic model of our system, sufficient fire flow will not be available from the 4' steel main line located on Illinois St. However with the installation of an 8" line Extension connecting across Riverside Dr. on Robertson St. The pressure and Fire Flow will be sufficient to meet Riverside County Fire Dept. Standards of 500gpm for a 2 hr. duration at 20 psi (see attached info). ACENDA ITEM fJo. "3 PACE~O;.: 37 W~ WATER 3 ENG~NEER.IN~I INC. ~ WATER · WASTEWATER. RECYCLED WATER FAX TRANSMITTAL If you have trouble receiving this transmission ..- -.,.--. ~ To: Michael Mosler From: Eric Howard Of; ElSinore Water District Job tI; 088-03 Fa;!( No: (951) 674-5429 Fax NOI: Date: 06-27-07 At: Water 3 Engineering Total Number of Pas- Hard CO" blCluding ThIs Page: 2 To Follow: Yes X No CUrrent and Future Pressures at the Intersection of Rose Ave and Illinois Street - with possible future SUbject: 8-Inch main extencDng across Riverside Drive (Caltrans) Right-of-Way cc: File MESSAGE Michael, The following is a figure showing the location of Nodes J456 along with a possible future 8-inch main extending from the north side of .-uverside Drive across the Caltrans ROW to node J456. The node is located at the intersection of Rose Ave (Robertson to the north) and Illinois Ave on an existing 4-inch main, the possible future main looping would be a 8-inch main extending from the 6- inch main on the north side of Riverside Drive to Node J456. The pressures predicted by the electronic hydraulic model of t. ifferent conditions are listed below. Assumi . crease in ground elevation, a 280 foot long B-inc 'n extension from the inte should have similar pressures to those predicted at the intersection. rle J456 - Elevation (per model) = 1.2.'30 feet Predicted pressures at Node J456 (psi) .X:::. .).: ::::': ..:~::::.:::;:i ~<T::::::<.: :::':> :::~~\It.~re'IC!9Ping"~~ WnJ1 Mu.~ lPopinsimain"'" ".:: .: ..:.::: ::~:.;:::~~ :~:;: :;::-: ::::':' :..-., ~~ve~ knust... ~ + Fire flOw Average Annual MD +'F.ue floW' .:f::;~~;:;i:::;:~~:!~:'~~:'::';::::~<)~ :::;'0:" _..'.....d....(~'Ar,' ::::.: '/4n at N~ '.0' 'd'(Mo)": (ff)': at NOde,,"". :",; ;::;::;:::~::: ;:::..;:..::.:.;:... : .... ... '..i .'~; ::: :.. E;l~" . ~J .':. . :\1" ~: .. '.. . : .: . efTU:\fl. ..... . :. . ... ...... ,..' :; . :::;:'::'::~~~.~>::::';,,;.. ::'.'~::. ..-:::;~::.;t~:~.'COndjtiorl:: :.... ...... '.J456. .. ..: .....:.. .Condition ;.: ..... .1456':_:,,".:; ~:W~7;~~~~:f:~:':. 142.26 neg(-)100.36 142.30 82.08 . :Reserv.oirm saNtee:;':.; , 'F.u.t~~;CQnditiOf:JlS;~~:', ,: :'~th;J...~:::i::~~~;~D i;i'" ':ReSerWir'in':se-rvtc:e.' 127.64 nag (-)154.34 142.02 98.10 Please give me a call me know if you need additional infonnation - Eric AGENDA iTE/VI NO. 3 PACE. d# OF ~, ~ ~""'~L'(,...~""~'l,~l.'" /t? ~ .. ". ~,,"., 375041050 N. ...:tL..... '~.!::l1l.1, .......~ ~ ' S'i ~". ..:g <:;.,< / "L.. ,'5> ..' ",,< .., ~ ../ .",.< /~ ~ 8' . .... .'" .. . . . B'Oj / <l,\; .... o:l-.. ;tJ.' /.0. '$ " .. ':l.-/,p;.o' I> '. '.' . . ~ ~. ",. ....-::..>< ,,-:: ,"..<.,< .~ "' '. ~ i:: .' \GI 0\ CO ./ ~ ~ .> ,.. '. . "-10' ...,. _".V' .., ,.' ...J.:!.o". '. f;:./ #' ./~ "<#./~<... ~.", ,.' i<: .' ,p...... < .... ,'''''../' ,< \. rP, . !y" ,w>'. ,< '" ". ..' ~rt"<./. ,/ ,p-"t'.... '. ./ ~/"375062042"'<'~,/ . )..~.'\. ./~,p;.. ......1.'" .\ ~. ....,/. rfJ.\OJ".. ..,' I..'i. :'..<'~.. .... ..' ..... . / " .' . '. . ..- ....rf:l ..' ,,' r-H ....... ~ ". .... I~ ... ....' -,^\':'o', \ ' u ..' ~..V"".. Ii, . , ..' ~"'.' '.' 1}'""' . ,....~f"J~"\ <" rfS.,......~... c "'.":. ,..:' 1.~' ,....... ..&.~. '..;' O. . \.... ,~ ....... ,Ii.. '':':' . ,,1,\:! ':.' :\,'W"" :V". .' T'" .', ... ,. ~'" .', '0" .' . .",~--..__.-.._-._- -.._,:' ...'. ..' ~)..~ '.':.-" '~\f;;)"-,....'" ....~' \ .~\ ~"":~!,)1..\;...,..,."~ .... I,; ..,.../' \" " .... " ,,/\ .,/ "'-.."'''' / ...... ~< ... .... ""~""'.'/ '. /~<. ,0'. ....... -",,' ..' ",,< ..... '" '-. ,__.... /..<Y. ./ ... ..... ...~... .'. . .' ~-.. . '-..,.- · . " . . --... qv . <.., "'_ / ". 37_' ./\~~~.~\ '. '<~':.~;~~.\ \ \ ~ --'\'\.. .,.....;#1.~~".. .\ 9;"''\Y- ~/.... ..: '" ". .A', .....>...If.oI' .c.' '..' " ...::..~ > .. .^ V.'. '.,/ . ,/ S ... ~,\, .// ", ........,.~..~........~"'\..~ ....J,...,~Q...":~.......:'i...... ../ \ ~\ .. ,,,.,.., '..,./" ~ . 'l\... .... . "'.. ..' ::..m. .., .. .... " ..... ." ./ " '" '. . '" , " '" 'l, '.,/ '. '- ~ ..../ ,,;p'-........... 'l< ',,/ "...- ..'",''' ./ ". ",.'" .... 0 ~\"" ~. . '- ..... "./,pl>> .',", '.' 19' ,,:po" "... ;,. 'Q- '. '" ~ l!i './\ \. '\.... ~ \..~$<:;;;;~< ..~~. '\<i1I>'// .~ ..,;;;.~ \'d \. "" " o ;~. . ~ '. ~ " :r .../ t;j..... /" '. '../ 9;.{:j '......r....-.. '"" " .....<"\".x:"" tt./ '"' '. '0.'. ,.. <' / . ...... /"""""'''' vi" .. , ... " ~ '- ". ""'./ "';/ '.'. ./io.I>..' ~. · '-. '" '. \!,.... .... ". ... ,0 '-./. .. , ....3 '. <.t. \, -.;. \. "'. ,,' ...... ".", . ~\ ~,.,.,- ~r;",;,.,." ,...,......" \ ~""', 01 '- ~ '.. ~ ',- ...../ ,/>:;,p;':\ '1;r.,,,,,>.. ;,<,...:p;,<,), \ ./.. '~ '> 'q; \. ~ \. \/ .... yr / .,< .... ';'./ +' ../ dJ' ,/ ". /' l> '-r. ~\ \, ~ ". .' """, ,r'" \.~~ .,.., ". ~ \. ~ \" 1i., .-r'" ~,lj; '.. ,.. e.r!' ,9,...9. ..'\;;... .... .\/ .,.-( \..."~" ..,'" .r:, \ .. ..} u~"\J"__ ....... .' '. Ii' '. 1) ...~-V" "\'.' ....,...,.r,." ..' . ..-._.-'" ~ ... ... ..,...... ... ~ .... / ..,.;;/ " r ",' .. ~ ~'\% \./r\/ .../ \. '" \.. ~ <; ~<~/ ...../~'...~\\ ..........,.,.,......~..... '.. \~....._;;~l.S,,~:.....~ Q ..-' / \" \ ~ .. ';';0- .... cJj" .... ... .'J' ..' ,,'" ; .._...,...._ ~ Q) . ri' ' ~ " -po ~ "....... :-.;. , \ \" , N \'./ ,/.. ~ \ -a'" \ ....' ~\.'i, ... ...: . ..... \ . ._ iil ,/ /...... .... .... ~..... /.<... ....,...' '. ..... < \ \ "",..ill' .G'" ..:" '. ~ '-. i.. \. \.... " "" ../'\. .,.... ?" " \ L~ .. , ....... "'. / , '. "-",... . '/'. _a' . \ .._ ./' ". ~ ", ~'., ~ '.. ..-". \, ~ \ ,..~.;:;...~:. _..-~ '. :..,. ..,', '!"- " ~- ......--'... .... c::! \, ~., ..\: ". r.a '-:'" ~- ..,.' };. ,:.~ , .,.r" \ ~ \ ............----', ~ \~ ...~~~~.;L_t._. .... '''''. ~ '. ~ · -' , '!>. \ ~ ' ./...,.... V' \ ,~\--- \ \, . .._., ,A, :.. It.. '. I?..... )/ ... ~ \. C2 \.., '\OJ", .:. ~. i. ',Y.'." ,...""IE '" .,.... _ ." '. .. , 'So , ....... ." '. .... ... \l, '. ../ _ _,..". ,__ -.. ~ '-. -& \ \.,/ \ ~~... ~~.... V' \, ./ ~ \ \ ~ \, S~O \ I \'"..'..._' ~ \ ~ '. ;r;:... ,,", " '. ',' .," c.3 '. 0 \ ~ \ _ .~~ . ~ ~ -- ~ .. '" '. .,' .. ri' '\ '. , .' ,-' ~ . ~ \ i _...........-. '" . \1,. ~C\L;" .._ ..e. '. Q", \-,., , ~ \ ~... . ".>." ./' "1. ~._..~.'.1- __L-+-\\~~IOI~.~..L~_.~..\.. ~....- '8l \, ~ .... ..,,., ". ... "at \, 'G' . .", J'" I. ..... _ _ 'YIo . _. _ . \'; \ X ~... ~ .... \./ ,;. ..... . ..._ -Il"., " _."......-' ~\ ':A .\./..... \. \. \. ....... ~ . \\ ./,., .,~.,.,.<(' H \ ':. t ......t\\.tOSLt \,'- t€O"~~J.._.~\\ \ 'r';~~"~L.: ~ \.. ",,/''.\ \ ~ \. ~, \.., /'" .., \ \~. \', '5._ \I~W __._._~\ ....O~€09Ll>__\. OQ\ \..Y~__.-;,. I;) '\..'- ~ <g. '. ,... '..' .,..,-(.~, I, .._-----\, ': ,-:r _ ~ .,.. ~._ \ i,' '" rl'''g..... ~ .....~', ... ~ \ ~ '-.. '. .' -,. Q",. --. 1-_- -,.,- ,(10 '\ ....c.v-:-:' _- -' '.... _. . ./ , ; , \-.- ~ ; , - -...~ .' - \ '" \. ... \,?,;;"\./ -( \ ' \ \" -"-", \ ': ,..',.,"" \ ,tIl' .....-, \ "-;;1"- \ ~ '-. ~". .... -' \ \ '\ " \ --...-- ~.'. I \ .".".., N'!Lt' '... . ch ' '"' \ ~. '..... -, \ \,. \ -' tIl\'~ -, '... '; ,,/" .. ~, '.. /" I \ i ~JE \ , \ ~_.- I 0 ._---. \ \ -. '. '0 l;j '" '. i. \ ! \ , \ \ \ \ '~.. \. ,_ ""'" ..' "',., ,... ,~ ~ '\ \ ~ '. '. /' \ ' \ '.', ...-..\'.,- ~~:.--\....'::---"~, ~\ \ ~ ~ .., >,; \ \ / ,(, \ '\ --. \.-" "Q9L' L- Q9L'''' '. ~ ~ ... ~ '-.'v . \ \ , ~ \--.--. \ " t'fO ...--...., g'tG\.\; __...~.\ \ U1 ql. . -w / \ ": \ '\ \ ~, $" ~09L~ \ \.'''''-'-'O'-;tOSL.t ~\"""--:':SL~ \. \..-=1f"' 'go . ..v..- \ ; " \ c.t \ ul', ~ I ez \ '. . ~. ._ \ j."'l)\b" ....... Ci . :.>- \. \ 0 \. :. \ '. ~^ \ 'i1. \ Gl., I ..__'~ . \ ..._'~" "r. ...--- II i~_ ' "'.'f! /, \ . ,'" '" \l., \ - ",' C-' , -'-~Il' ' ~~. i\ '" '. :; \ 'I" \ , "'... " , \l.' " \ tl c-'-' ....L. ,"';' ...... .~. """.~_....\ ... '!O'er ~ \, 'v" - , . U'!' I \ ~ I, ~ '. Q~ \ 0 \ ~ \ \, gtO ...-'-'\ % \, ~\... \ ..._....-:..e.Lt ". a S?l gj '1:',. , ~ l \ l.:..t ; ,=" \ ~. '. . ".,..- I'" , .... ....... sto' ",1,1'" a .u,- . · .... \ ~ " . b1 \ Ul ". ~ '. ... '. ~ \ i '...- ~!$~'" 'J 11\ \ _--, . _-"4. J>,,"'-, ~ \ / ~ ~ ." ~. - '. " " -- ,", - ." .. ~ " . , - G " \ ,~ \ ". '" ,.... _''''... _ <S.., ~ -L- . .., .. .Jo ....... ;> ~ i · \ ~ \ $ \ -!:. ., ~ \ :. \ ; \. _.......~.t' " io": \-"......n\& _.....-:.,O\.i..... _~ I, \ ;;; ;lI " ,/ /:\ :il , " \ 'Il \ \l. \ Ii \ i \ \ \ ,-' .....~.\ '. ":::'----- \ :::---;;;;,0 \ \ '(l:t. li\ " .., ~ , . ~ . Ii , , , . , . '__ , \.,-_ ,< ...- _,... :, '" ... . ,., . \ ~ ~-\ -:;, fD . \ , , \ \ 1,,_' \ " Q'$09~ i teN .r."---, \ ~ c:Y ....[ " \-' \ Q ,--t \ -'" \ \ '. \ \ ! \ ~L~' . 1J.!. \._....~--\...MlL~., i ; .... . ." , I;D ",'.... CI \ 1 I \ \ l . , _tl l."" , to \ ~. , olio \ ~ i. ':::i ! \ " \ \. \ , \ \ g1i \ __--. """ _--.\ i ~ D -,- "'~, " '_r '__,., " "'. \!l,..-.. \ '" , " , ", ',' \ ~_, ,__- ',__ "'''', . ~ \ \l. .. E" \ \l. " \l. \ \ '. \; \ \ ~'--O;<"'L' \ , ~,'W" __,,_.\ \ ~ ; ~ , \ ~ ' 'il." \ \ ,\ _~'_', .. __'~"', '.....' .!..__- "''' \ '. ~ l - \ ~ \ ; Z1' \ :.>- \ . , \ ': _.1. --""-' j,....-..~09,1.: ...i " _.---- '\ lj7;O~t ......."~ \ -l>o go I ~ \ "-'\..~-..\.. \ '. \ 'l._"-"~""Jt .~...~..-: a .."..---"' \ ' .....___ "",IE \ __'.' ,,, '. III D::J ' - - '. . '-- .._~... . _ Jt \ ~ . ....=:,....._._.....'::-' n ..-Y" .. '. _}-"- "1-::::;.;;;:. ".--'r~'" _'" . _ ,", "._ , , ::r "" ,..--' - ..," gSlilT'I'::._.......-- '., _----.. !, .".-~Q,,~L~ -\.......;"o~~oG~:\ .' - I-E ..' 7.'::. ,_-......,.. :, 9.. __-. \ ;j 1: - --<"'.:-r-." . ---":;;..... ".--.....; tJi'>;jf;1l' \' _':.;o,"'L'.~<, "...Il' j .... - I ''- "<:"- __....--.. .. t" .) \,: :1 ~.. ..-,.--- 1 ~. .-._...-. ~ . ", , , . . . '. -'.......... -"', --" - '. ". , .. , i c,,;;.. ..-- ~~_~. L...--." \ .r ...'>;J!;._-;..-;;o,,.,......; ;; ,~; iii ~ -" ---' ....."'t .._--. ...... . ...___-.. ,--'-9J:. '; cl : g!l ;'!! !:l ";t.... .. -_.....;g;,;;.,<J.. . ~ ~..; ~A 'ind.."., \ Q ;:'! . 0 .... I ~ : ":::,~ -....-.-..- g}, ...-.-_...--~. ". .'...._"" ~. '. 3 1 ~ """-- p-. I i :~~..~>,./ '-""".t-~"''''9Lt . _.-..o.r~. · "Of'. 7. ! \ \ .. ....\ ~ ~ If' o co .~. ~ f!l ..., "'" '~ ._..:-0' N o o Date 7-02-07 Name Roberto Rosales Address 20085 Plessner Way City Wildomar. Ca. ZIP 92595 APN # 375-034-035.036.037 Street Name Rose Avenue ESTIMATED COST ~ater Account DeposH $ 100.00 D Fire Hydrant $ ~Installation $ 2900.00 ~on Fee/Capacity Charge $ 5594.00 D Permits $ D Hot Patch $ D Miscellaneous $ g Total: (meter installation only) $ 8.594.00 / ~ ue to the length of line extension, it will be necessary for you to contact a Civil Engineering company of your choice for cost estimate and installation. "Exhibit A" attached hereto lists requirements for first plan check. Cost of Plot Plan Check dependent on estimated cost of project. **Note: Estimate valid for 60 days. ** ELSINORE WATER DISTRICT LlJ~~ ~ Water Operations Supervisor ACENDAln:M NO.-3, , . . f)AC~Or- '3, . ~ Organized Under the Laws of the Stale of California ELSINORE WATER DISTRICT 16899lAKESHORE DRIVE P. O. BOX 1019 lAKE elSINORE, CA 92531-1019 (909) 674-2168 EXHIBIT A REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRST PLAN CHECK RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Water Plans (to be approved by District) Record Map Street Plans Storm Drain Plans Grading Plans Erosion Control Plans Conditions of Approval of Tentative Map Easement Documents and Plans Title Report, Deeds, Etc. Easement Boundary Closure (to 3 decimal point min.) Coordinate List 3 copies 1 copy 1 copy 1 copy 1 copy 1 COpy 1 copy 2 copies 1 copy 2 copies 2 copies 1 copy 1 copy Any Appropriate Survey Notes Any Reference PMlRS/Etc. 9. Inspection Deposit Payable to Elsinore Water District in the amount established by the District. 10. When a tract is to be phased, submit an overall conceptual water and sewer layout on the tentative map. Indicate size and type of mainline pipes to be used. - 1 - 1'\ ~t:nDA IrE'" ""'0. -:3 nV(,.;,I"i ,~) Ie . PAC~_ ~S-. OF 37 Service Commitment Letter # 2006-0 Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Monday, April 30, 2007 P.O Box 3000 - 31315 Chancy St. - lake Elsinore, CA 92530 (951) 674-3146 - FAX (951)674-7554 Zoning: Acreage: Tract Map: 4 <1 I- I I location: Rose Avenue, Lake Elsinore, CA Residential 375-034-034, 035, 036, 037 (951) 265-6493 Fax: (951) 674-4733 # of Lots: I APN: L~hon.e: Roberto Rosales 20085 Plessner Way Wildomar, CA 92595 Attn: Owner Paid Date: $75.00 4/24/2007 Cash/ 178344 Will Serve Fees Paid: Check I Receipt #: c---- Water Fees Effective Date 4/1/2007 to 6/30/2007 -I ~r(.')j~clWILL ~O T B~_~fi.~'(E~t~r: thefCl'!~"Yjng rea~o1](s):_ Parcel will be served by Elsinore Water District. !. .-----=-= ..____ Sewer Fees Effective Date4/1/2007_~~ 6/~~L2007~-===~__._.____J Proje.c.~j~_el;g;lJ'e fOLservic,!. b!J~~cLo!,. JIl.f!.!.C!lIfJ."'!.i!!g_ conc:f.ition~;__ Before sewer service is available to this parcel, a sewer line extension of approximately 235 must be constructed in addition to lateral construction to each lot. See attached Procedures to Construct Sewer Laterals for District requirements. Additional inspection fees may apply. Please call Kim at ext 8265 to schedule a meeting wih Greg Kowalski regarding District construction requirements. Fee Description Unit Capacity Qty Ratio EDU Per EDU Base Fees CreditlAdust Net Fees Total Amt Regional Sewer Connection Fees will be quoted after Plan Check Domestic o o $0.00 #Num! $0.00 Fees per Unit: $0.00 Total Sewer Fees $0.00 $0.00 Total Water and Sewer Fees Sewer Lateral Location/Marking Procedure To schedule an inspection appointment for a sewer lateral connection, call EVMWD's Engineering Department at extension 8265, at least 48 hours in advance. To schedule a pre-construction meeting for sewer lateral construction, call EVMWD's Engineering Department at extension 8265, at least 48 hours in advance. See Procedures To Construct Sewer Lateral for additional information. Note, you musl contact Underground Service Alert (USA Dig Alert) at 1-800-227-2600 for all utility marking at least three working days prior to digging. Current water and/or sewer connection fees are subject to change without notice by the Board of Directors and fees will be based on the current fee in effect at the time of payment of fees. ACENDA ITEM NO. PACE ::>" 3 OF f-:2 G'd 9VGO-BLL (156) zaLloues O']:la:;}O..J e5G:11 LO LO 90 Service Commitment Letter # 2006~O Elsinore Val/ey Municipal Water District Monday, April 30. 2007 P.O. Box 3000 - 31315 Chaney 51. - Lake I:lsinore, CA 92530 (951) 674-3146 - FAX (951) 674-7554 l!aid Dat=~_~_ Receipt #: -~=~ ,-- ---- .. ----------------~-~-~---_..__....~- I WaterlSewer Fee Payments Check #: Paid: f1:Le Date: 4/30/2007 Loren Sorber Inspection Services Manager ACENDA ITEM NO. 3 PAC~ ~~OF 9 7 E.d Si:>'20-8LL [lSSl zal.loues O'[la~o..J eS2:11 LO LO so CITY OF ~ LAKE ,6,LSiNORf: V DREAM E,XTREMEtu Notice of Exemption Filed With: D Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Sacramento, CA 95814 ~ County Oerk of Riverside County 2724 Gateway Drive Riverside,CA 92507 Project Title: Minor Design Review of a single-family dwelling unit located at 17002 Rose Avenue (APNS: 375-034-035, 036 & 037). Project Location (Specific): The three existing vacant lots are generally located on the east side of Rose Avenue approximately 100 lineal feet south of Illinois Street at 17002 Rose Avenue. Project Location (CityJ: City of Lake Elsinore Project Location (CountyJ: Riverside County Description of Nature, Purpose, and Beneficiaries of Project: A Minor Design Review for a single-story single-family dwelling unit with an attached three (3) car garage located at 17002 Rose A venue. The subject property has a Zoning designation of R-2 (Medium Density Residential) and a General Plan designation of Future Specific Plan J (Country Club Heights #1). Furthermore, the proposed project will have a net lot coverage of approximately seventeen percent (17%). Name of Public Agency Approving Project: City of Lake Elsinore Name of Person / Agency Administrating Project: Matthew C. Harris, Senior Planner, City of Lake Elsinore Exempt Status: D Ministerial (Section 15073) D Declared Emergency (Section 15071 (a)) D Emergency Project (Section 15071 (b) and (c)) [8J Categorical Exemption (state type and section number): Article 19 Categorical Exemptions Section 15303, New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures Reasons why project is exempt: This project meets the requirements pursuant to Section 15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Contact Person: Matthew Harris, Senior Planner Telephone Number: (951) 674-3124 x 295 Signed: Title: Director of Community Development Rolfe M Preisendanz AGENDA ITEM NO. PACE. d ~ OF 3 '31 z o - I- ~ W ...I W D:: o ...I o o ACENDA ITEM NO. '3 PACE ;;l'1 OF 31 . . [ ~- -- III] ~;w:. [ [illJ] ~ ~ ~ [ill:!] ifi ~ "' (B) eci)w~~ = (I) C/) > <c :e r.t!ilJ .. w ~ <c () 8 a:a:cmu.iori nnno coa:::l ~ l.L (I) <C a:O'" (Qb w~C\I~~ ~ ~ R~ ~ ~ ~ .-~ ~ [illJ] ~ :5 ~ NV1d :illS ~.:: -- -j--. ~~ . ~~ I o.U . fI) ! w IW I- - U) SIONml ii 110 IlIll1llt=1lI U~-8 III ii..; ~ d ; .; II B II -'- _1.-1:'" _I_I.... -~ ,nl........" '.'11"..011 III 3ON301S31l M3N !ION!ICDtBl::I tB"'IY8Ol::I NV1d ~OO'::I llNlLMlCJ . NEl!&;IQ 9NY1d YW911:1d IIIH III q Mf 8 h II i, ! N ! ~ ~ I I i I Iii i < ~---" ...._-~--"~ d 5 ~ ~ -..'..... ~ ~ ~ ~ . ! r ----''..'........'..,.---i ...n"'--"JIf-'" I-~ d ~ .. 0 .,5,~~ I ~ !, ,f' .~ ~ It. l .r~~'I' . ~ j ~~~ ~ .~ ~:... )~. ~- r; ~ ----..~ ,.-- ~-'_ -!I :: ~ I~ ~ - ~ I I ~-J. -A r--------"I II. i i ID~ (m,' ~._ itl\ ~ ~ ,_nmmmi:~ C-. __.uL__.~ II ~"I-."~ .gl? :i: :. II r.'\ ~ ~ [f ~ IV J7 ~ 0 .!Ir.'l ~ J1 i . i :l i , ~.od . i i! ~ ~ u-tt.~JL:~.~ 0 ~ ,--,- -~~: ~{4~-~~ -,~, F~-lrt-- i ui--Tc=---- -- ~i"--" '-nr -, ~ : ~ WI ~ i .-..r : ~ : :.. :I: i:: ~ i : : 0 ~ i 01 ~ I i I I -.. A-.:j"---- ~.,<=-:-J ~ _ "1~~,., ~ 7\,...: i,1 t:t//jj ~~-.-.:I r." i J>-" ~ -i 1-__ _"':'=" '-.-:.::1._ i .. ~ ~ i J>-a -1....- ~ : r~".' .. r - ~ . , " ~ 11 \\ , " ii ~ ~ ~ ~ i!! ~ t // ~~.,~ .-.., e...: ~ rR ......- -,..__...._-~ r" ~ ;~ p r----~ s ;;~ } ; I 100 s ;;~ ,. J ~G n"."n~ Z ~ a.. a: o o ..J LL t --~ I : . " I I ~ ! I "1 /1 i-a I I e8, I I iii '::,J -- ~ --_.-._-- J>-'" -~ ......- ......... - -~...--_._-- ~- J'.\GENDf'\ iTEM NO. "3 PAGE ~, m: "3 / ~,- =':~,: --- .........__...UOI..."V:II NVld ~OO'.:I S310N llNUMlI]' NlllS3Q 3ON3<HS3l:I M3N !ION!iIO..... fB"'MiI()H i ~ I I ~ i Ii ; I ;;~Ial ;1 ;i~; !~!8 i:~ il lill 1m i Iii I Ii !; !!:~i!ll! i II a I; ~ ~~au . I i~~B I~i ~ ~I Ii ~ I I~i I ~I a~ !~ r II ~ l! I I' Ii i 1~1li- I!!I ~!! !11111!ille! ,I~il II!~ i I ~ !i .1 .,ll! 1:ldli I, I: II ~! :I! j' I !! II !~h i~i ~hl !il! II~i!:1 ill I i III jl 'l~l!lj! ~ UI I,s I ~ II Ii I' i ihl,ll!: III !JI:! ,.- i~il ~'I n~'! I: .iQ ! I ~l~~ II illll!l! ! ~~I ~II I; :; I III ~I.II! I!~; I!ih II~ ~I! I ~!i III: II~ II~~!! i I w~ ~I~ I!i~~i~i ~d M !i .~!! ~; J ~I ~~IIII ~ ! ~!. !bu JII ~I!hl In ~ ~bil HI ~~h R R i i gl, ~~d!!dl !I I I~ - .; li I SNY1d YnSI~d I. I I ~ J I I- i 'i !I- I ~.p nlld i I ,; I:I~ ;;. 11 I ~ Id I e ~II' ~ ij ~. "!lv~ I~~ ! - ~ I.! ~ i~~ ~ ; I II I~ 1111 ~~i II~ I ~. b 5 ~ ~II~I!: ~ ~ I~ .-11 i II~ II ad II a Ri ~ lli~i :2 ;I~ 9 i !! l ~ . lis f II!I U~; II! i!i~ 1.1 ~ 2 ,. d I :11 ~ II IS!S ij :! )j i I I\!!;i f n ~ III g I~ Itll II! 11.1 I~ "II ~ I- II i I I 5 I~ lit II S. ~ K IzlS B5e I~ ~S SI III ~ I~ I i h I. ~ 1116 il~L ~I;: .:il Ii; lie.. ~~ Ii~ Ii ~'i ill d ~a ~ ~ ~ I. III ~II!H In q llaifi III; ~ 1= ! en i ~! I · II dai <( .a-.r .G-.r. s;ll~ ~I?;li~ 51 ~, ~Ii~w l~u i ~ !; ~ ~ I ~ · i ~II~~ .~~ ! ~ ~~ S I? ~! I; ! I,; ~ l~i~2~ II:~ ~i1 is ; I 2 ~ l! ~. ~ ~ a;li~~. a; ~ ! ! li I ~ I! Ih! :1: ihll; ~ I ni~!: II~! i I ~J f ~: .a;Ii< ~~ ~ ~ II ~ ~ ; ~ ~Iii~!i IP ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ! ~ !IIi! i~ il If!! leI ~ ! I it~Z ~ d 1ft! 5 2 ~ <Ii! iSl d tt ~~ I!t a II.' ~ ! ~~ I ~ I II ~ ;gill~ ~ iL li I~ i Ihib ~ t! BBBB~~E1~~ ~~~~~~~~ f!I C) Z U ~ . ~= , W 't- i':i :I: a:: W t- ~ t .It-> ~ ~ ~ . ~ . ~ ] ! ~ ~ . t) Ij ~I tn W l5 z ~ Ii i III. Id. III .." I! Ilil ~ '11 I .11 ~ III "It III ~ If ! I'. r~i' ~ i .~~il II: :~;e ~ IIIII .r.< Illil - ~ ~ I'i I' h ~ ~~ I~fd .il ~,~ I;; ~I !;~~ _7. !Iill ~ .. wI? ~~~~ ~ e 6 6 @ a a :i 5 ~ ~ , I .. ~ " '" .. il: 2 P ! ! ~ ~ it: ! ~ Cl ~~:I: ~ 'i 'i ~ i!' ~ ~il: ~~ ~ g~ ~ i~ ~ liip; :Sox ili ~~ -;:"X l!i oi!l .. l! l" ;;!~ 8 ~ ~8 "' ill'" " lS ~~ ~~ i ~~ ~~ 8 ~~ i i i Ii i~ ITEM NO. 3 P~CE_ S.~_OF_ '3 -F- ~'- 'YIl...=.m...C111 ElNLUWCI' N!lOlOIa SNYld YWSII:Ic:I ,1-.11 ~ ~ SNOU~3S ~ IIIII II! ~ I __ Illhll!! I i ! I ~= . ~ ! I < I i III. 'C iiI '" . . -c ID ;. . Z Z 0 0 2 ~ II (f) fD b .... ! ... w ~ , -. Iii U) 8. Z ~< !; 0 .. i= 0 w U) .o-.M- 3:lN3CIS3ll M3N ;r.)N!Icn8ill:l 8B"I'W8Ol:I AGENDA ITEM NO. PACE -'- __I'" _1"''111II -~ ,....-......"....." 3ON301S3ll M3N ;r.)NIGI_H lB'1Y8OH __ NV'ld :MXnI 111l! 11111 EN1.:NYa. NOIIBQ SNY1c:I YWSll:ld ~~~I I I 0: I I It ::r: I .~ U I i!; Q~ I ::r: IG u ,><, I c t:: I : !~ Q D..- U ~ N S)6: N I N I "<t N I "<t t !~ !~ G .-f1-,. S1H3!. V _.t. ________j-----H51~ ll:t ., I I I L_____ G "<t !~ :~d -. .~ A t II i~ I R~ !l ;= ~ ~= \! ~ iia !r a ~G Ii! !i <\,. Ii ~i ! ~ i III ~ l! !~~~ ~ i ~.g~~ II ~ .!i:n I i'li I ell ~. ~ ~ Im~ I I~~ ~ ,~. e I ~. ~ ! . i i i dij~ ~ lidS, ~I; ~ Is I IIi i I ~ I I~i ~ili ~l 1:11 i!i : i ~ I · ;1: 0: ~ i f s;~' III. II .1 ~b >~ ~ I · I U ~ i ~ ~~i: I~;~ ~ ';I!;h~! ~~! I Iil ~11~iI ~ J~IIJ~~I >; i ;:J ;~5;1 J ~I ~ ~ I sl.1 il3dfiin i51 i ~~~ IIi: B~I= MI t l_ ' ! I~: u;> i a II IS <( Z;o <C~ ...I 0 D.. u.. O~ O~ D::~ z 0 J 0 ~i . ~ o~~ ~ "- gg~ ~ ~~ .,; u~ Ii! , !ij!ijb ~ ~~~ !.IOu. x ~!1~ '" g ~~~ 8 ., '" "" " N "- ;;!; .,; 8 ~ ~ ~ ;;;- ~ ~ .'" U 1;::3 x fil .,; fit a. '" '" ~ ~~ t:' ~ g ~ fit '" ~ "'- " ~ Di:Q ~ .,; Di ~ S 8 I~ ~ '" ;$ o~ 1= 5 ..; 8 "" Z x '" ~~ w ~ ::l z > 0 ~i (,) ~!ii ~ ~ ~ !ij ct~ ""~ ~ jil:l 0 ;~ :;;1ii1 ~ ~o 3 PAGE :s ~OF 3 {. :CJ:li: --- 11'U."__lIl'Hnll..V;oJ SNOIJ.vmEJ .II!!! Iii H 11.118 h ~ I J~ I I ~ I ~ · ~ II I liB i lIoIl.LMIlJ. NElI~a 3OtSOIS311 M3N !iIONlICJlsal:t 8!!f'IV8OI:I __ SMnd VWSll:ld #-.. -H--- _"'/M. 11 ..... ..... z '" 0 ~ z .. 0 > - w 1 ~ .... Gj U) W I- ~ .... z z w 0 . 0 0 ~ - ... . It: U ~ I 18 ... di L&- ee > ~ as. 1 m W 51 ' -' . , hi ~ W =000 = DO DODDDDDD DODDDDDD DDDDDDDD DDDDDDDD . 18 ;1 - air 51' . , hi DODDDDDD DDDDDDDD DDDDDDDD DDDODDDD 00000000 DDDODDO DODOOOOD DOODOODD r'~11 -,-$1 ..... ..... =l:N,-:- --- ''ft.I...a_.~'.'''Il..Qg llNUJVllCJ 9 NElIS30 SNYld YWSll::ld . ,. 51 iir ~If ; . Hi' ~.. lS1 /f I t ~ . -------~ji._------ z o i= ~i=: WLL ....W We. W Q US ~ j/ SNOLLVt\313 3008lJS31l MaN iIONaOI8B1:l1EI'1Y8OI:I __ ~ 11111 1!1 q II.II iI h I; ~.. . ,. ~II iia ~If ~ - hi le. V z o t= ~i=: w::C ....e" W- W~ Q US !~ ! f"- 1;1 <i: li i IU i .. '< en :z Ob i= ~ <C :! > ... w i ....I W i\CENDl~ ITEM NO. PACE 3 C" OF =l:k: -~ ~..."""'I....:;I SNOIJ.VA31:1 ~ II!II I!i H I Mf~ h ~ ; ~~ ! co I ~ f - I I I ~ ~H i <( ElNIUWCI. NlllIBll 3:lN301S31l M3N lIONilOI8alH 8IiiI"IY8OH _ SNY"Id YWSIHd b~ II --~ n .= I! .~ n __1 g II Z ~ 0 - & t- .. z~ ~i= .. & 01 ~ ~ i ~ w::E: ...J -Je) w I w- Z lIl: w$. ~ 0 m C i= (j) ~i= IS] [S] wu. IS] -JW W:::!. W [S] C (j) -.. '" . [SJ . 0 0 ~ ~ f; :I: i - W Ii.i n ~ ~ i (I) iii ~ ~ It _0<__ H .= B~ '3 PACE 3/0F '"?Jr -.. -.. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: OCTOBER 16, 2007 MINOR DESIGN REVIEW (MDR) OF A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 408 NORTH LEWIS STREET (APN: 374-032-007). JOSE CESAR, 31172 WISCONSIN STREET, LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530. JOSE CESAR, 31172 WISCONSIN STREET, LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530. PROJECT TITLE: APPLICANT: OWNER: PROJECT REQUEST The applicant is requesting Minor Design Review consideration for a conventionally built Single-Family residence pursuant to Chapters 17.82 (Design Review); Chapter 17.14 (Residential Development Standards); Chapter 17.23 (R-1 Single Family Residential District) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC); and the Lake Elsinore Historic Downtown District and Architectural Design Standards. BACKGROUND On May 15, 2007, the proposed project was scheduled and presented to the Planning Commission, however due to questions regarding work that occurred prior to this date, staff was directed by the Planning Commission to continue the project to an off-calendar date. On May 25, 2007, staff notified the applicant regarding the meeting and the issues that needed to be resolved to proceed with the consideration of the project. The applicant advised staff that the issues were resolved, and that he had complied with the "Stop Work" order that was issued by the Building Division. The applicant also indicated that the submitted plans for this project included a grading plan that included the perimeter walls and that he will not do any additional construction until City approvals are granted. ACEjj~~':~M '0. a; fd1 "...... "'-~'. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE (APN: 374-032-007). On May 29, 2007, staff received a letter from the adjacent neighbor indicating their concern about the grading and construction of the walls on the site. The neighbor noted that the walls blocked their existing view. On July 26, 2007, staff received a letter from the applicant, which provided a brief history of the events that took place, which also indicated that he had complied with the City's "Stop Work" order. The applicant also included an approved building permit in the letter for the construction of the perimeter walls, which was issued on July 17, 2006 and indicated that nothing else had been done on the property. On August 18, 2007, staff met with the applicant to review all of the issues that were presented by the adjacent property owners as well as those by the Planning Commission. During this meeting, the applicant provided staff with all of the supporting documents including a copy of the wall permit that was issued by the City, as well as the acknowledgment of the grading that took place prior to the approval of the proposed project. The applicant reaffirmed that nothing else had taken place since the issuance of the "Stop Work" order by the City. On October 2, 2007, the proposed project was brought back to the Planning Commission for consideration. However, the construction of the walls were questioned, specifically, the portions that included retaining walls. As a result, the Commission requested verification of inspections and the structural integrity of the existing walls. The Community Development Director indicated that a report would be obtained from the Building and Safety Manager, which would verify the inspection and proper construction of the walls in question. The memorandum from the Building and Safety Manager clearly outlines the chronology of the construction and inspection of the walls, reflecting compliance with the Building Code requirements and noting that proper inspections took place. The memorandum also reflects that the wall have been properly inspected and approved by the City's Building Inspectors. (See Building and Safety Manager Memorandum) RECOMMENDATION Staff requests that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2007-_ approving the proposed residential dwelling unit based on the Findings, Exhibits, and the proposed Conditions of Approval. PREPARED BY: AGUSTIN RESENDIZ, ASSOCIATE PLANNER APPROVED BY: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT y raq AGENDA ITEM NO. PACE d- OF REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE (APN: 374-032-007). ATTACHMENTS . BUILDING AND SAFETY MANAGER MEMORANDUM DATED OCTOBER 10, 2007. . PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATED OCTOBER 2, 2007 . VICINITY MAP 1. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2. PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 3. SIGNED AKNOWLEDGMENT OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 4. NEIGHBOR'S CONCERN ABOUT WALLS AND GRADING 5. APPLICANT'S RESPOSE AND HISTORY OF EVENTS 6. APPROVED BUILDING PERMIT FOR PERIMETER WALLS 7. NOTICE OF EXEMPTION 8. REDUCED SITE PLAN & BUILDING ELEVATIONS 9. EVMWD "WILL SERVE" LETTER 10. EVMWD WATER & SEWER LOCATION MAP 11. COLORED SWATCHES 12. LARGE EXHIBITS AGEJJDA i~O. PACE_ ~ y OF Co ~ CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE BUILDING DIVISION MEMORANDUM TO: Rolfe Preisendanz, Community Development Director FROM: Robin Chipman, Building & Safety Manager DATE: October 10, 2007 RE: 408 Lewis Street / Retaining Walls Rolfe, On February 15, 2006, Mr. Cesar obtained a Building Permit for retaining walls, garden walls, and pilasters at the above mentioned property. The structural design of the walls for this project was based on the City's "Standard Handouts" for Retaining Walls, Freestanding Block walls, and Pilasters. These handouts have been plan checked by a structural engineer and are applicable in approximately twenty different cities as well as the County of Riverside. The applicant only needs to follow the tables and guidelines on the handouts to insure that the walls are constructed properly and meet all requirements of the Building Code. I have attached copies of these handouts for your review. The following text is a chronological report of the events that took place during the construction ofMr. Cesar's walls: In May of 2006, The Building Division received a complaint that the owner of the property at 408 Lewis Street was digging footings for a wall and was blocking the neighbors who live across the alley from accessing their property. Senior Building Inspector Bill Belvin responded to the complaint, and on May 11, 2006, wrote Mr. Cesar a Stop Work Notice informing him to come into City Hall to resolve the issue. When Mr. Cesar came in to City Hall it was determined that he was constructing the walls near the alley in the "Public Right of Way" and would have to move them back. It was also discovered that when Mr. Cesar obtained the Building Permit he failed to tell the Technician at the counter that the lot was undeveloped. He was then told that he would not be allowed to continue until he obtained Planning Division approval. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAC~"~~. 'f If OF f.R C( ~._r____ Several weeks later Mr. Cesar met with Tom Weiner the Planning Manager, who instructed Mr. Cesar to revise his site plan, showing the walls with the proper set back from the alley. Tom also reviewed the issue of the walls being constructed on an undeveloped lot. Both Tom and I determined that the exposed footings and rebar presented an unsafe condition and potential hazard to citizens in the area. Mr. Cesar returned on July 17, 2006, with his revised plans for Tom to review. Tom reviewed and then signed the approved plans, and Mr. Cesar was allowed to continue with constructing the walls. On August 18, 2006, Mr. Cesar had called for inspection on the footings and reinforcement steel for the walls. The footings and steel were inspected by Building Inspector Neil Hansen that morning and approved (see copy of job card and Neil's sign off). Later that same day I called Senior Building Inspector Bill Belvin, and asked him to go to the property and make sure Mr. Cesar was following the Approved Plans. I had received another complaint from the people across the alley and wanted to make sure Mr. Cesar was following his approved plans before he placed any concrete. Upon arrival Senior Building Inspector Belvin confirmed that the footings were in compliance; however Mr. Cesar had used left over concrete and asphalt chunks to partially fill the footings after Inspector Hansen had left the job earlier that day. Senior Building Inspector Belvin informed Mr. Cesar that this was against Building Code requirements. Mr. Cesar promised to remove the debris from the footings prior to placing any concrete and Senior Building Inspector Belvin agreed and left the job site. The next morning on August 19,2006, Senior Building Inspector Belvin sent Building Inspector Scott Bums to Mr. Cesar's job site to confirm that he had removed the debris from the footings as he had promised. When Inspector Bums arrived there were concrete trucks on site and they had already begun to place the concrete in the footings. Inspector Bums noted that there was still debris in the footings and contacted Senior Inspector Belvin. Senior Inspector Belvin arrived and stopped all work on the site. The concrete trucks were sent away, and Mr. Cesar was instructed to remove all of the debris and freshly placed concrete. His previous approval on the footings was withdrawn and he was instructed to call for are-inspection of the footings after removing all concrete and debris. After removing the concrete and debris from the footings, and setting new reinforcement, Mr. Cesar again called for inspection. The footings and steel for the retaining walls were approved for the second time on October 5, 2006 (see Scott's note onjob card). Ilt'"'?Y' , l"f''''~': .,,. '",~,c...v:". I (;;~Jl i\i PI\GE._ OF '. - -'-' If ~Cf.. After placing the concrete for the block wall footings Mr. Cesar continued with construction of the walls. Two weeks later on October 19, 2006 Mr. Cesar called for pre-grout inspection. Building Inspector Danny Rodriguez performed the pre-grout inspection and Mr. Cesar was approved to continue the walls by placing grout in the cells of the wall (see Danny's note on job card). As a closing statement I have complete trust in my staff and the approvals they granted on this application. It is my professional opinion as the Building Official for this jurisdiction that Mr. Cesar has complied with all applicable Building Code requirements as it pertains to these walls and that they have been properly constructed and inspected. Sincerely, ~k.~ Robin K. Chipman Building & Safety Manager I'.r<i:""'"'A '1 ,,, ( 1 KUii-~'JLi. ~ L:.:~~i fijO. -'{ PAGE_ ~ OF ~ cr- ~.,-, ~ 1lI00-6LI (19S) 8l9E-6Ll (19S) ~i~! I <>EctZ6 v:J noNlS11 '])(V1 =6 ~ '11IONISU DIV1 OESl6 Vj '1110NlSl'1 'DIYl Nnd idYaSGNn/IIGUYlIIHHIIUIS i~ I~ ~U .... ~]1lLl5 NlSNC>>SIM. 'lLUE .1.11lllS NlSNO:>sIM 'ZLUE ~1nLS SlM11 N _ ynO ~il'Glld I ~ 1SOf 1IV= lSoI DN1<IIS1H X11dl10 nO~S-oAU J3iHS lIiAGa cr: lAg J..Q3l1V,QVd SNV1rJ 'HldOllA1CJ!UNMO '110~ SNVld , t: t: ~ ~ t: 1/ 1/ 1/ 1/ It ! ~!!; ~~; ~ ~ ~ U l!! it "'" ' , If ! n ! II ! i I II i ~ ; ~ ~ E I . ; = I 2. -: . I~ ~; :z 9 ~ i cc ::e II: ~ I W II I il G I '! i I I I I ~ ~ 'Iifl; ill I! I.i! ! I I = !I = II v I S i I~!i 15~!i .~I( I~I( ... .. Cl ~ :::I Illl S I I ~. Iii i ~II ;il!i ~,If: III II i Ii C g ~ it I ! == ~ ~ ~ ;1 ~ II . II il Iii II!il 111;ii If: , ~!( ~.;!I ii!!i ! 116 flh; UI!I. 11,'1 f4 h II g 1'11., U I',. ~ Lil,i u iur. ~ dllil ! ;1 a "i .. I _. ~ I ill S ; Uli ! ~ E:i ! ~ ill. c E ELS\NORE crr't orO~\tI.\~ O\V\S\ON BU\L \'1 _ tb'-~2.Z~ PERM\' '# ~ I - Ai~fih"EO .- ~__~~:~. _-L_ ~UGIUI'~~~~___'~~~ I I I I I I :!I --t .. 5 .. ~ .. .. I I I Ii: I ~t I ..I I I UT11"" .- H hJ ! d g r j 'S <) ~~ \.\:"2 ci ~ ~ ----2 ~ ..........(J ~ j ~"'-. ~ IQ) LE~ ~ @If \~~~ i~ I-~~ \tt~ ") ~Ol( \3l ~ ~:(~ r-~ %;:.:5 S;~ jQ.~ *- 8.tl~J~ -.9 ~ r- ~ f' 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ j j t l\.. () ~g~f ~ ~ ~ i ~ j t.!) \ ~ "--. 2 '0 ] 3 J -<! : e ~ rj' $ J is i i J J ACENDA ITEM NO.~... PACE I OF 0cr ~ ''"'' "'"", 8 '.~ - ... City of Lake.. Elsinore I . . 130 South Main Street PERMIT PERMIT NO: 06-00003332 DATE: 7 17 06 JOB ADDRESS . . . . DESCRIPTION OF WORK 408 LEWIS ST BLOCK WALL OWNER Cesar, Jose & Maria 31172 Wisconsin St LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 CONTRACTOR OWNER A.P.# OCCUPANCY CONSTRUCTION VALUATION 374-032-007 8; 10,000 SQUARE FOOTAGE GARAGE SQ FT FIRE SPRNKLR ZONE. . . . o o NA BUILDING PERMIT QTY UNIT CHG 143.00 ITEM CHARGE 63.00 75.00 5.00 PAID DUE .00 143.00 .00 27.60 .00 1. 04 .00 .50 .00 103.50 .00 275.64 6.00 X 1. 00 X BASE FEE 12.5000 VALUATION 5.0000 PROFESSIONAL DEV FEE FEE SUMMARY PERMIT FEES BUILDING PERMIT OTHER FEES PLANNING REVIEW FEE PLAN RETENTION FEE SEISMIC GROUP R PLAN CHECK FEES CHARGES 27.60 1. 04 .50 103.50 TOTAL 275.64 SPECIAL NOTES & CONDITIONS 195LF OF BLOCK WALL wi 23 PILASTERS Opel': COUNTER Type: DF Dra~er: 1 Date: 7/17/06 17 Re[eipt no: 304 200& 3332 EP EUILDING PERMIT 1 $275.64 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE Trans number: 102734 CK CHECg 2468 $18039.31 T,..~n'" rbt..' 7/t7!f11=. Tim,,' t7~t7~4h FOOTING OPTION "A" FOOTING OPTION "B" #4 HORIZONTAL AT 32" MAX. O.C. (USE BOND BEAM BLOCK) #4 HORIZONTAL REBAR (USE BOND BEAM BLOCK) I,'H" 6" OR 8" BLOCK "H" HEIGHT FROM TOP OF FOOTING SEE TABLE "A" FOR REBAR SIZE AND SPACING lLocATE REBAR IN CENTER OF cEI..1.) FINISH GRADE (1 ) - #4 REBAR ONTlNUOUS REVERSE DIRECTION OF HOOK ON EVERY OTHER REBAR ~ "W"--.j I (FOOTING WIDTH) I SEE TABLE HAn HEIGHT FROM TOP OF FOOTING SEE TABLE "B" FOR REBAR SIZE AND SPACING (LOCATE REBAR IN CENTER OF CEu..l (2) - #4 REBAR CONTINUOUS ALL FOOTINGS ADJACENT TO SLOPES TO BE AT LEAST 5' TO DAYLIGHT AS SHOWN BELOW. C.H" UW" VERTICAL REINFORCEMENT #4 @ 48" a.c. #4 @ 48" a.c. #4 @ 48" a.c. #4 @ 24" a.c. BOTTOM OF FOOTING UHn .: uw" VERTICAL REINFORCEMENT 3' 19i' #4 @4S" a.c. 4' 22" #4 @48" a.c. 5' 29" #4 @48" a.c. 6' 34" #4 @ 24" a.c. ~ ~O~II10RJ; ~.... 3.' 17" 4' 20" 5' 23" 6' 29" NOTES: 1) THIS DESIGN DOES NaT ALLOW GRADE DIFFERENTIAl..SOF MORE THAN 6" ON OPPOSING SIDES OF THE WALL. THIS IS NOT A RETAINING WALL 2) FENCE HEIGHTS ARE REGULATED - CONSULT ZONING REGULATIONS BEFORE BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION. 3) NO WATER COURSE OR NATURAL DRAINAGE-SHAli.BE OBSTRUCTED. 4) GROUT ONLY THE CELLS CONTAINING. REBAR. THIS WALL IS NOT DESIGNED FOR ALL CELLS TO BE GROUTED. 5) ALL REBAR TO BE ASTM SPEC. A615, GRADE 40 MINIMUM. 6) ALL REBAR LAP SPLICES TO BE 24" MINIMUM. 7) ALL MASONRY UNITS TO BE ASTM C.90 GRADE N. 8) REBAR TO BE CENTERED IN MASONRY CELLS. 'SEE PAGE 2 FOR ADDmONAL INFORMA,ION" DISCLAIMER: AL1'12:RNAiE DESIGNS MAY BE POSSIBLE WHEN PROVIDED WITH AN ENGINEERED ANALYSIS. USE OF THIS STANDARD DESIGN IS AT THE USER'S RISK AND CARRIES NO IMPLIED OR INFERRED GUARANTEE AGAINST FAILURE OR DEFECTS. CHECK WITH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT ,0 VERIFY IF A BUILDING PERMIT IS REQUIRED. WHEN A PERMIT IS REQUIRED, THE FOLLOWING INSPECTIONS ARE REQUIRED: 1) FOOTING: ExCAVATION TRENCH CLEAN wrrn STEEL IN PLACE AND SUPPORTED 3" ABOVE AND AWAY FROM THE SURROUNDINGEARlli/DIRT. 2) REBAR/PRE-GROUT: BOND BEAM REBAR AND VERTICAL REBAR IN PLACE' INSPECTION PRIOR TO PLACING GROUT. 3) FINAL: AFTER GROUT IS PLACED' PRIOR TO ANY DECORATIVE CAP PLACEMENT. WESTERN RJvERSIDE COUNTY CODE UNIFORMiTY PROGRAM CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE BUILDING DEPARTMENT FREESTANDING BLOCK WALL 130 S. MAIN ST LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 1/22/2007 PAGE (951) 674-3124 EXT #224 PACE ll~~ Iii ~1 ljr~ M~ iilj~ III ~II ~I 1III TOP VIEW FOOTING BLOCK GROUT STEEL REBAR SECTION VIEW 1~11 ::" III i:i:i I~ll rll MIN24" REBAR OVERLAP REBAR PLACEMENT ILLUSTRATION I _-::J::- :::..-- -- BLOCK (12"X 12"OR 16"X 16") SOLID GROUT (4) - # 4 REBAR (ONE AT EACH CORNER) MIN. 24" REBAR OVERLAP ALL FOOTINGS ADJACENT TO SLOPES TO BE AT LEAST 5' TO DAYUGHT AS SHOWN BELOW. I. 27" FOOTING REBAR SHALL HAVE A MIN. 6" LONG HOOK AND A MIN. CONCRETE COVER OF 3". .1 CHECK WITH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY IF A BUILDING PERMIT 15 REQUIRED. WHEN A BUILDING PERMIT IS REQUIRED, THE FOLLOWING INSPECTIONS ARE ALSO REQUIRED: 1) FOOTING; EXCAVATION TRENCH CLEAN WITH STEEL IN PLACE AND SUPPORTED 3" ABOVE AND AWAY FROM THE SURROUNDING THE EARTH/DIRT. 2) REBAR/PRE -GROUT: VERTICAL REBAR IN PLACE- INSPECTION PRIOR TO PLACING GROUT. 3) FINAL; AFTER GROUT IS PLACED - PRIOR TO ANY DECORATIVE CAP PLACEMENT. DISCLAIMER: ALTERNATE DESIGNS MAY BE POSSIBLE WHEN PROVIDED WITH AN ENGINEERED ANALYSIS. USE OF THIS STANDARD DESIGN IS AT THE USER'S RISK AND CARRIES NO IMPUED OR INFERRED GUARANTEE AGAINST FAILURE OR DEFECTS. LIMITATIONS: 1. PILASTER SPACING SHALL NOT EXCEEO 20 FT. WHEN OTHER INFILL FENCING IS ATTACHED. 2. ONLY OPEN TYPE FENCING (SUCH AS WROUGHT IRON) MAY BE ATTACHED TO PILASTERS. SOUD TYPE FENCING MAY NOT BE ATTACHED TO PILASTER. 3. GATES AND DOORS ATTACHED TO PIlASTER ARE UMITED TO 200# MAX. WEIGHT AND 4 FT. MAX. WIDTH PER PIlASTER. 4. THIS PILASTER DESIGN IS INTENDED TO BE USED Q.ti!...X AS A FENCING FEATURE AND IS NOT INTENDED TO SUPPORT ANY OTHER LOADS. 5. FENCE HEIGHTS ARE REGULATED - CONSULT ZONING REGULATIONS BEFORE BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION. 6. INSTALlATION OF ELECTRIC CIRCUITS. CONDUITS. OR UGHTlNG FIXTURES REQUIRE ELECTRICAL PERMITS AND INSPECTION. 7. FOOTINGS TO BE PLACED IN UNDISTURBED SOIL OR PROPERLY COMPACTED AND ENGINEERED FILL 8. FOR DESIGN PARAMETERS, SEE FREESTANDING BLOCK WALL STANDARD. WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY CODE UNIFORMrTY PROGRAM CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE BUILDING DEPARTMENT ~ ~Cj~iN.OR!': ~I.. MASONRY PILASTER (951) 674-3124 EXr #224 130 S. MAIN ST LAKE E cy 1/22/2007 PILASTE "H" 6'-Q"MAX TYPE 1: 6" TOE ~~ ,<O~S\-~~~~\ 2 ,,< '\~\-;\ ~~ 1 r-:::>S~~ f;)~ '< . '4'G<?J" IF LEVEL GRADE SEE TABLE FOR LEVEL GRADE TYPE 2: 6" HEEL o~,~Go~s\-~~~~\ 2 ,,< ~~\-;~ ~ 'ZS~'<:~O~'< . ~~r:,~ ~ IF LEVEL GRADE i 00-00- SEE TABLE FOR LEVEL GRADE 1 =Rn =Rn #4 HORIZ. AT TOP COURSE #4 HQRIZ. ATTQP COURSE #4 HORIZONTAL REBAR AT 24" ON CENTER #4 HORIZ. AT 24" ON CENTER Y-BARS 2-3/4" MAX. (NOT SHOWN TO SCALE) #2 TIES r uH1" (12' BLOCK) Z.BARS 24" N/R N/R N/R 24" N/R N/R N/R N/R = NOT REQUIRED #4 @l16" #4 @l 12" #4 @l16" #4 @l12" #4 @l 32" #4 @l 32" #4 @l 32" #4 @l 32" 33" #4 @l 24" #4 @l 24" 18" 26" #4 @l 24" #4 @l 24" 13" 20" #4 @l 32" #4 @ 32" 7" 20" #4 @ 32" #4 @l 32" N/R .SEE PAGE 2 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION" WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY CODE UNIFORMITY PROGRAM CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE BUILDING DEPARTMENT DISCLAIMER: ALTERNATE RETAINING WALL DESIGNS MAY BE POSSIBLE WHEN PROVIDED WITH AN ENGINEERED ANALYSIS. USE OF THIS STANDARD DESIGN IS AT THE USER'S RISK AND CARRIES NO IMPLIED OR INFERRED GUARANTEE AGAINST FAILURE OR DEFECTS. ~ LAKE 6LSi110R,f: ~. RETAINING WALLS (951)674-3124 EXT #224 130 S. MAIN ST LAKE ELSINORE CA 92530 1/22/2007 RE.TWALLFINAL.VSD PAGE 1 OF2 AGENDA rrEM NO. PACE l ( 4- or- fa '1 -,--~~ CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION TO: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: OCTOBER 2, 2007 MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 408 NORTH LEWIS STREET (APN: 374-032-007). JOSE CESAR, 31172 WISCONSIN STREET, LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530. JOSE CESAR, 31172 WISCONSIN STREET, LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530. PROJECT TITLE: APPLICANT: OWNER: PROJECT REQUEST The applicant is requesting design review consideration for a 3,554 square foot conventionally built single-family dwelling unit pursuant to Chapter 17.14 (Residential Development Standards), Chapter 17.23 (R-1 Single-Family Residential District), Chapter 17.66 (Parking Requirements), and Chapter 17.82 (Design Review), of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). BACKGROUND On May 15, 2007, the proposed project was schedule and presented to the Planning Commission, however due to some construction and grading that occurred prior to this date, staff was directed by the Planning Commission to postpone the project to an off- calendar date until those issues could be resolved. On May 25, 2007, staff notified the applicant, about the results of the meeting and the issues that needed to be resolved to bring the project back to the Planning Commission. At that time the applicant advised staff that he had resolved those issues, and that he was aware that there had been some illegal grading and the construction of walls, and that he had complied with the "stop work" order that he had received. The applicant also indicated that the plans that he submitted as part of this project included a grading plan and the perimeter walls and that he will not do any additional construction until he obtains City approval. On May 29,2007, staff received a letter from the adjacent neighbor indicating their concern about the grading and construction of the walls on the site. The neighbors noted that the walls blocked their view of the valley which will now be lost due to the scale and the development of the proposed project (See attachment). AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE I :)- OF It (Pi REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 2, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE (APN: 374-032-007). On July 26,2007, staff received a letter from the applicant, which provided a brief history of the events that took place. In the letter he also indicated that he had complied with the City's stop work order. The applicant also included an approved building permit for the construction of the perimeter walls, which was issued on July 17, 2006. Once again he indicated that nothing else has been done and hoped that this information will clarify any misunderstandings (See attachment). On August 18, 2007, staff met with the applicant to review all of the issues that were presented by the adjacent neighbors as well as those by the Planning Commission. During this meeting the applicant provided staff with all of the supporting documents including a copy of the wall permit that was issued by the City, as well as the acknowledgment of the grading that took place prior to the approval of the proposed project, and again he indicated that nothing else had taken place since the issuance of the "Stop work" order by the City. In conclusion the applicant agreed and understood the issues that were presented and why the project had been postponed. Staff then scheduled the proposed project for the October 2, 2007 Planning Commission meeting based on the project's current information. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Project Site Vacant R-2 (Medium Density LMD Low Med. Density Residential North Vacant R-2 (Medium Density LMD Low Med. Density Residential South Residential R-2 (Medium Density LMD Low Med. Density Residential East Residential R-2 (Medium Density LMD Low Med. Density Residential West Vacant R-2 Medium Density LMD Low Med. Density Residential PROJECT LOCATION The proposed project site is located at the east side of Lewis Street approximately two hundred feet (200') north of Pottery Street, within Redevelopment Agency Project Area Number1. The property is zoned R-2 (Medium Density Residential), and has a General Plan Designation of LMD (Low Medium Density). The proposed project will obtain water and sewer services from EVMWD, since the nearest water and sewer connection is located AGENDA ITEM ~ PAGE 13 OF ljjCf REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 2, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE (APN: 374-032-007). approximately 190 lineal feet south of the site, and more accurately at the intersection of Lewis Street and Pottery Street, which also happens to be the exterior north boundary of the Lake Elsinore Historic District. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is requesting design review consideration for the design and development of a 3,554 square-foot conventionally built single-family residence, with an attached 718 square foot three (3) car garage. The total building footprint including the residence, entry porch, and the three (3) attached garages, is approximately 2,995 square-feet or thirty-four percent (34%) of the 8,700 square foot lot. Architecture The applicant has chosen to construct the proposed single-family residence using elements of "Mediterranean" Architecture, which can be defined by the stucco walls, tile roofing, and variation in rooflines, window treatments, door selections, and decorative entries. The elevations of the proposed residential unit are enhanced by multiple rooflines as well as significant articulation along the elevation planes. The proposed entryway and widow treatments are representative of Mediterranean Architecture; in addition to these characteristics the side and rear elevation takes advantage of the existing view opportunities by providing a series of sliding glass doors and large windows. Landscapinq The applicant will provide front yard landscaping which will include an automatic irrigation system and a rain sensor, assisting in the conservation of water. The applicant will also provide one (1), 15-gallon street tree thirty feet (30') apart along the street frontage for compliance with the City of Lake Elsinore Landscape guidelines. All of the proposed street trees will be selected from the approved street tree list. Color and Materials Roof Walls Window surrounds Trim & Columns Barcelona Red Castle Bei e Auburn Auburn Lightweight Concrete Tile Stucco Foam Surrounds Wood AGEND1\ HEM Lf PAGE t:t OF =roC; REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 2, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE (APN: 374-032-007). ANALYSIS Staff has reviewed the project and found that with the attached conditions of approval, the project meets all minimum requirements pursuant to Chapter 17.14 (Residential Development Standards), Chapter 17.23 (Single-Family Residential), Chapter 17.66 (Parking Requirements), and Chapter 17.82 (Design Review), of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), including, but not limited to; density, setbacks, landscaping, parking, private open space, and lot coverage. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15303(a) (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures), staff has determined that the proposed project is categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA. Therefore no additional environmental clearance is necessary. RECOMMENDATION Staff requests that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2007-_ approving the proposed residential dwelling unit based on the Findings, Exhibits, and the proposed Conditions of Approval. PREPARED BY: AGUSTIN RESENDIZ, ASSOCIATE PLANNER APPROVED BY: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENDA lJEM 49 PAGEKoF~ REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 2, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE (APN: 374-032-007). ATTACHMENTS: 1. VICINITY MAP 2. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 3. PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 4. SIGNED AKNOWLEDGMENT OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 5. NEIGHBOR'S CONCERN ABOUT WALLS AND GRADING 6. APPLICANT'S RESPOSE AND HISTORY OF EVENTS 7. APPROVED BUILDING PERMIT FOR PERIMETER WALLS 8. NOTICE OF EXEMPTION 9. REDUCED SITE PLAN & BUILDING ELEVATIONS 10. EVMWD "WILL SERVE" LETTER 11. EVMWD WATER & SEWER LOCATION MAP 12. COLORED SWATCHES 13. LARGE EXHIBITS AGENDA ITEM ~ PAGE~OF ~9 MINOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT AT 408 N. LEWIS '" '- II' '~, .....-'_4~Nlj-___., -~, ~ij;-. -". -----"" ---. i ' I / I / / /~., ..... ---.,~/ /c~ -"-.....' / ' -'----........... ..... (. 7 i,l '--- ~,:-.., '" ....., , '-, ___., / /1 IL, I ..~~.--- 7 """..... i /' ./ / --'r~'~~-~__ ~J - ,/ , I ' ". ":--"" I / t, / ,I / ___._ '------- : , , ~ -l.. , ( '/, ' ! ! " r.c::." -"::---", I ~~.c.... / / . / .! I ; , ;:::"."::-,,,,,,/ r--__ ~---.L / ,/ /: I ,., ------; /'~ -'--J_, j ,/ I i / !" ~~ ~ I i / / ! / I j~ ~. / -----,--.. t:; ".--.J., , / I / I , ,.~'~..,' '~J' ~ ____.."---i.....-L / . ',/'" ! ----~ ~ --- "---< ' / ~ -~_ / ---..----.,:j r..----. ___, .----L / ~ ',-I--. I I ---" ______ ~ ~ I -. ,I ~''c-.. ----...... ,-N ~ '~' ,~-- .... '. --- ,'" -..! ' .'-----... -'~.--R ~,-----.~.,-~,J-_____,,-~ ~ ,IL~ -------J......... -~~./ Jj ..----l-~~ / I---,~ -""'~l.~,.~ '-'-'7/' , -",- '-, -""',( ~i ~i~/. / - ! --.... ! ......-----....... -------. -......... '---. ! / '-. ! r. '__ 'it,1 . ! '----..... /., II j,'---' '~~." / i...............~.-~__. .---... ! ,.e--........-.. _ -"--.. /b~,t:; / /--'''''' -...:', ~-- ", , ~'-,_ r '-_ it; i~.~ /~, / / ,.,/ '~-';--"-- -.. -~! '---. '-. ~ '-. "-. '---.. ! I - --- ---. ) II! j'- ~, I , "-. ...... , -.. ----. "- ''', ,-,~ i -,r~ .~, '"'---<" "~ '-.., ---., ""----.. !.....~- --- -~- -.'...--....-./ ~ ~-............-..... / '~I-.....'- ~-. '-.. '--- .J... -- t----,_ j! ...---.....--"_ / ,I ,.~ ~! /.._-~-. ' .~. ./ j'__. I '~_ j ~ -..-.. '---.. / ~.L / ~-, '7 .--~..--../ I L ! " / 1--___. " -.-1.. ; / '_. ! I~~-i I / I, " '-- ~-L.. I , / / I' -",,~-~-,,-..l......... I ,/~-'~-.. ,," ~------...._--_/ I ~_ / "-"~ /L~ ..-/----"'~,I I ~/~,' /..' /~ / L ~-"------J ------j I'~ /~-~ I !r'~ ~/I / / / /~~'-J .. / .' '-..... / ( / / / I '~. " .....J...... /'--...,,-----~~,J ----- ---. / .~ r~ ..~--.-----.j / I __ - I j / I "-.:--:~--:---. 1/ ~~J ; I II / / / I I ,/ / ' ..rlt"'~A. L... / II j / / ''7'>'eJP,'~ I . '1P~ -'__ / I /' - ~-..,~ ~,. / I ~ -- PLANNING COMMISSION ACENDA ITEM NO. If PACE \ --, OF _0~_'~'= RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A MINOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A TWO-STORY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT WHEREAS, Jose Cesar, has filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore requesting approval of a Minor Design Review for a conventionally built two-story single-family dwelling unit with an attached three (3) car garage on a property located at 408 North Lewis Street (APN'S: 374-032-007); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of considering and approving, conditionally approving, or denying Minor Design Review requests for residential projects; and WHEREAS, public notice of the Project has been given and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public meeting held with respect to this item on October 16, 2007. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the proposed design for the Project and has found it acceptable. The Planning Commission finds and determines that the Project is consistent with the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. SECTION 2. The Planning Commission finds and determines that the Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Pub. Res. Code 9921000 et seq.: "CEQA") and the CEQA Guidelines (14 C.C.R. 99 15000 et seq.) pursuant to a class 3(a) exemption for new construction or conversion of small structures because the Project involves construction of one single-family residence. (See 14 C.C.R. 9 15303(a)). SECTION 3. That in accordance with Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Chapter 17.82, the Planning Commission makes the following findings for the approval of the Project: 1. The Project, as approved, will comply with the goals and objectives of the intended General Plan and the Zoning District in which the Project will be located. The Project complies with the goals and objectives of the General Plan in that the approval of the single-family residence will assist in achieving the development of a well-balanced and functional mix of residential, commercial, industrial, open space, recreational and institutional land uses as well as encouraging the ACENDA ITEM NO. "1 PACE.-..lli- OF ro 9 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE20F3 development and maintenance of a broad range of housing types for all income groups and age categories. 2. The Project complies with the design directives contained in Section 17.82.060 and all other applicable provisions of the Municipal Code. The Project is appropriate in size and surrounding development in that the single- family residence will complement the quality of existing development and will create a visually pleasing, non-detractive relationship between the proposed and existing projects in that the architectural design, color, and materials proposed meet or exceed the size and design of the homes in the surrounding area. 3. Subject to the attached conditions of approval, the Project is not anticipated to result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. A Class 3 CEQA exemption may be invoked when the development proposal involves construction of one single family residence. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15303(a), the Project is exempt from environmental review because it involves the construction of one single family residence. "Section 7.3.2 of the MSHCP states that: "[d]evelopment of individual single- family homes on existing parcels, in accordance with existing land use regulations is a Covered Activity within the Criteria Area, " subject to an expedited review process. Impacts of development of single-family residences on sensitive habitat and covered species were accounted for in the MSHCP and the MSHCP EIR. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the single-family residence at 408 North Lewis Street was sited on the least sensitive portion of the lot. Consideration was given to access, topography/terrain, zoning standards including setbacks, soil types, presence of earthquake fault lines, leach fields, presence of oak trees and high fire hazard areas. The building foot print area is appropriate and complies with the MSHCP Criteria Area." Moreover, the Project has been reviewed by all City divisions and departments, which have imposed certain conditions of approval on the Project to ensure that no adverse impacts occur. In light of those conditions of approval, as well as the design features of the Project itself, the Project will not have a significant effect on the environment. 4. 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 Project to ensure development of the property in accordance with the objectives of Chapter 17.82. Pursuant to Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Section 17.82.070, the Project has been scheduled for consideration and action of the Planning Commission. The Project has also been conditioned to comply with all aspects of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. The Applicant shall meet all required setbacks and AGENDA rn:;:~~ NO. If PACE l q OF roC( PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE 3 OF 3 development standards pursuant to the R-1 (Single-Family Residential) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). SECTION 4. Based upon the evidence presented, the above findings, and the conditions of approval, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Minor Design Review application. SECTION 5. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of October 2007, by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Michael O'Neal, Chairman City of Lake Elsinore ATTEST: Rolfe Preisendanz Director of Community Development ACEf\lDA ITEM f~O. 4 PACE ~ 0 OF '" C, CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PROJECT NAME: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNIT AT 408 N. LEWIS STREET (APN: 374-032-007). GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. The applicant shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its Officials, Officers, Employees, and Agents from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City, its Officials, Officers, Employees or Agents to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning the Minor Design Review for a two- story Single Family Residential Development project attached hereto. 2. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officials, officers, employees, and/or agents from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City, its officials, officers, employees, or agents concerning the attached Minor Design Review project. 3. The decision of the Planning Commission shall be final fifteen (15) days from the date of the decision, unless an appeal has been filed with the City Council pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 17.80 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. 4. If the project proposes an outdoor storage tank, the applicant shall place that unit within the side or rear yards. If the storage tank must be placed in the front yard, the applicant shall screen the storage tank from view with material subject to the review and approval of the Director of Community Development or his designee. PLANNING DIVISION 5. 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. 6. Minor Design Review approval of a Single-Family residential unit located at 408 N. Lewis Street will lapse and be void unless a building permit is issued within one (1) year of the approval date. 7. All conditions of approval shall be reproduced upon page one of building plans submitted to the Building and Safety Division for Plan Check. All conditions of approval shall be met prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and release of utilities. AGoNO!>. \1EIHlO._ Y. '" "{-- PAce-2l-0F ~ 8. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, the Applicant shall sign and complete an "Acknowledgement of Conditions," and shall return the executed original to the Community Development Department for inclusion in the case records. 9. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall obtain and submit a "will serve" letter from Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District to the Director of Community Development. The "will serve" letter shall specifically indicate the specific water flow volumes for both domestic and fire protection water supply. It shall be within the Director of Community Development's sole discretion to determine whether the "will serve" letter is sufficient. IO.Prior to the issuance of any building permit for the Project, Developer shall enter into an agreement with the City and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Lake Elsinore to provide (a) 15% of the units constructed in the Project as affordable housing units in accordance with the requirements of Section 33413(b )(2) of the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health & Safety Code Sections 33000 et seq.), or (b) an alternative equivalent action as determined by the City which may include (without limitation) dedication of vacant land, construction of affordable units on another site, or payment of an in lieu fee at the rate of $2.00 per square foot of assessable space for each dwelling unit in the Project. For purposes of this condition, "assessable space" means all of the square footage within the perimeter of a residential structure, not including any carport, walkway, garage, overhang, patio, enclosed patio, detached accessory structure, or similar area. The amount of the square footage within the perimeter of a residential structure shall be calculated by the building department of the City in accordance with the standard practice of the City in calculating structural perimeters. II.AII site improvements shall be constructed as indicated on the approved site plan and elevations, with revisions as noted herein. The applicant shall meet all required development standards as indicated by the Single Family Architectural Design Guidelines and the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). Any other revisions to the approved site plan or building elevations shall be subject to the review of the Community Development Director or his designee. All plans submitted for Building Division Plan Check shall conform to the submitted plans as modified by the conditions of approval. I2.AII materials and colors depicted on the plans and materials board shall be used. If the applicant wishes to modify any of the approved materials or colors depicted on the plans, the applicant shall submit a proposal setting forth the modifications for review by the Community Development Director or his designee. I3.AII windows shall use foam surrounds and/or other architectural-type features approved by the Community Development Director or designee. 14. The Applicant shall comply with all applicable City codes and ordinances. AGENDA ITEM NO. 4 PAGE~dOF TiFf 15.A cash bond of $1,000.00 shall be required for any construction trailers placed on the site and used during construction. Bonds will be released after removal of trailers and restoration of the site to a state acceptable to and approved by the Community Development Director or his designee. 16.The Applicant shall comply with the City's Noise Ordinance. Construction activity shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 AM to 5:00 PM, Monday through Friday, and no construction activity shall occur on Saturdays, Sundays or legal holidays. 17.The 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 control techniques. Interim erosion control measures shall be provided thirty (30) days after the site's rough grading, as approved by the City Engineer. 18.Any exterior air conditioning or other mechanical equipment shall be ground mounted and screened so as to be invisible from neighboring property or public streets. Air conditioning units and related equipment may not encroach more than two-feet (2') into the required minimum side yard setback. 19. Garages or carports shall be constructed to provide a minimum interior clear space of twenty feet (20') x twenty feet (20') for two cars. 20. The Applicant shall plant street trees, selected from the City Street Tree List, a maximum of thirty feet (30') apart along all street frontages. Planting is subject to the approval of the Community Development Director or designee prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 21. The Applicant shall provide shrubs and plant materials as shown on the landscape plan. Any changes to the landscape plan shall be subject to the approval of the Community Development Director or designee. The landscape plan improvements and plantings shall be fully installed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 22.Any planting within fifteen feet (15') of ingress/egress points shall be no higher than thirty-six inches (36"). 23. The Applicant shall provide an irrigation system for landscaped areas onsite as shown on the landscape plans. The irrigation system shall be fully installed and operational prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 24. The Applicant shall provide a rain sensor as shown on the landscape plan. The rain censor shall be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ PAGE)-) OF ~q 25.AII exposed slopes in excess of three feet (3') in height shall have a permanent irrigation system and erosion control vegetation shall be installed in a fashion approved by the City's Landscape Architect. A Planting and Irrigation Plan shall be submitted, approved and planted prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Fees are required for review of plans and inspections. 26. Driveways shall be constructed of concrete per Building and Safety Division standards. 27.AII walls or fences located in any front yard shall not exceed thirty-six inches (36") in height with the exception that wrought-iron fences may be five feet (5') in height. Chain link fences shall be prohibited. 28.AII walls and/or fencing need to be located off the property line. If the Applicant proposes to place any walls and/or fencing on the property line he/she must submit a notarized agreement between the subject property owner and the adjacent property owner to the Planning Department prior to installing the fence. 29.The Applicant shall construct the City's standard six foot (6') wood fence along the side and rear property lines. Where views exist, the applicant shall have the option of constructing a tubular steel fence. The applicant shall be required to remove and replace any existing chain link fencing and any fencing that is in poor condition. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to contact the effected neighboring property owners. If the existing fencing is in good condition, this requirement may be waived per the approval of the Community Development Director or his designee. 30. The building address shall be a minimum of four inches (4") high and shall be easily visible from the public right-of-way. Care shall be taken to select colors and materials that contrast with building walls or trim. 31.The Applicant shall provide a flat concrete pad a minimum of 3'- 0" by 7'- 0" adjacent to each dwelling unit. The storage pad for trash barrels shall be concealed from public view. 32. The Applicant shall provide assurance that all required fees to the Lake Elsinore Unified School District have been paid prior to issuance of building permits. 33.Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall pay park-in-lieu fees at the rate in effect at the time that the applicant requests the building permit. 34. The Applicant shall satisfy all conditions of approval prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and release of utilities. 35.The Applicant shall pay the Multi Species Habitat Conservation Plan Fee (MSHCP) Local Development Mitigation Fee (fee for density less than 8 du/ac) prior to obtaining building permits. AGENDA ITEM NO. Lf PAGE :l':foF ~~'1 36. The Applicant shall submit a check in the amount of $64.00 made payable to the County of Riverside for a Notice of Exemption. The check shall be submitted to the Planning Division for processing within 48 hours of approval of the Project. 37.The Applicant shall pay all applicable Library Capital Improvement Fund fees. 38. The applicant shall place a weatherproof 3' x 3' sign at the entrance to the project site identifying the approved days and hours of construction activity and a statement that complaints regarding the operation can be lodged with the City of Lake Elsinore Code Enforcement Division (951) 674-3124. The sign shall be installed prior to the issuance of a grading permit. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 39.The Applicant shall pay park fees of $1 ,600 per unit. 40. The Applicant shall participate in the "Public Facility" fee program. 41. The Applicant shall participate in the City-wide LLMD. 42.The Applicant shall comply with all City ordinances regarding construction debris removal and recycling as set forth in Section 8.32 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. 43.The Applicant shall comply with the City's curb, gutter, and sidewalk requirements. LAKE ELSINORE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 44.Under the provisions of S8 50, the applicant shall pay school fees or enter into a mitigation agreement prior to the issuance of a certificate of compliance by the district. LAKE ELSINORE POLICE DEPARTMENT 45.The Applicant shall provide assurances, prior to building permit, that all requirements of the Lake Elsinore Police Department have been met. RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 46. The applicant shall provide assurances to the City that all requirements of the Riverside County Fire Department have been satisfied. ENGINEERING DIVISION 47.AII Public Works requirements shall be complied with as a condition of development as specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) prior to building permit. AGENDA ITE~O. If PAGE?lOF ~Cf 48. Submit a "Will Serve" letter to the City Engineering Division from the applicable water agency stating that water and sewer arrangements have been made for this project and specify the technical data for the water service at the location. such as water pressure and volume etc. Submit this letter prior to applying for a building permit. 49.Arrangements for relocation of utility company facilities (power poles, vaults, etc.) out of the roadway or alley shall be the responsibility of the property owner or his agent. 50. Provide fire protection access and facilities as required in writing by Riverside County Fire. 51.ln accordance with the City's Franchise Agreement for waste disposal & recycling, the applicant shall be required to contract with CR&R Inc. for removal and disposal of all waste material, debris, vegetation and other rubbish generated during cleaning, demolition, clear and grubbing or all other phases of construction. 52. All grading and street improvement plans submitted to engineering shall be drawn on 24" x 36" Mylar and be set into City's specific border and title block, and include City's specific grading or street general notes, for which digital files are available by an e-mail request to aQutierrez@lake-elsinore.orQ. 53. All compaction reports, grade certifications, monument certifications (with tie notes delineated on 8 1/2" x 11" Mylar) shall be submitted to the Engineering Division before final inspection of off-site improvements will be scheduled and approved. DEDICATION: 54. Dedicate a 2.5' wide strip of additional right of way alone southerly property line to the City for widening the alley prior to issuance of building permit. 55. Public right-of-way dedications shall be prepared by the applicant or his agent. Deeds shall be submitted to the Engineering Division for review and approval prior to issuance of building permit. STREET IMPROVEMENTS 56. Construct alley improvements from property line to one foot beyond the edge of existing pavement in the alley per approved street plans (LEMC Title 12). Plans shall be approved and signed by the City Engineer prior to issuance of building permit (LEMC 16.34). 57.A Calif. Registered Civil Engineer shall prepare street and alley improvement plans and specifications. Improvements shall be designed and constructed to Riverside County Road Department Standards, latest edition, and City Codes (LEMC 12.04 and 16.34). Street improvement plans shall show existing and future profiles at centerline of street, at top of curb and at centerline of the alley. The profiles and contours shall extend to 50' beyond the property limits on the alley c. e. nterline... U AGENDA ITEM NO. -t PAGE~OF ~q 58. If the existing street improvements are to be modified, the existing street plans on file shall be modified accordingly and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of building permit. An encroachment permit will be required to do the work. 59. Work done under an encroachment permit for off-site improvements shall be delineated on the street improvement plans and approved and signed by the City Engineer prior to issuance of building permits. 60. Pay all fees and meet requirements of an encroachment permit issued by the Engineering Division for construction of off-site public works improvements (LEMC12.08, Res.83-78). All fees and requirements for an encroachment permit shall be fulfilled before Certificate of Occupancy. GRADING 61. Developer shall obtain all necessary off-site easements for off-site grading from the adjacent property owners prior to final map approval. 62.Apply and obtain a grading permit with appropriate security prior to any grading activity. 63.A grading plan stamped/signed by a California Registered Civil Engineer is required since the grading exceeds 50 cubic yards and the existing flow pattern is substantially modified as determined by the City Engineer. The grading plan shall show volumes of cut and fill, adequate contours and/or spot elevations of the existing ground as surveyed by a licensed surveyor or civil engineer. Contours shall extend to minimum of 15 feet beyond property lines to indicate existing drainage pattern. Apply and obtain a grading permit with appropriate security prior to grading permit issuance. 64. Provide soils, geology and seismic report, as part of this report address the requirement of the Alquis-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. Provide final soils report showing compliance with recommendations. 65.Applicant to provide erosion control measures as part of their grading plan. The applicant shall contribute to protection of storm water quality and meet the goals of the BMP in Supplement "A" in the Riverside County NPDES Drainage Area Management Plan. 66. All grading shall be done under the supervision of a geotechnical engineer and he shall certify all slopes steeper than 2 to 1 for stability and proper erosion control. DRAINAGE: 67. On-site drainage shall be conveyed to a public facility, accepted by adjacent property owners by a notarized letter of drainage acceptance, or conveyed to a drainage easement. AGENDA ITEM NO. If PAGE 2:70F L'? 68. All natural drainage traversing the site shall be conveyed through the site, or shall be collected and conveyed by a method approved by the City Engineer. 69. Roof drains shall not be allowed to outlet directly through coring in the street curb. Roofs shall drain to a landscaped area. Driveways shall be sloped to drain into landscaping prior to entering street facilities FEES: 70. Pay all Capital Improvement and Plan Check fees (LEMC 16.34). The traffic mitigation fee is $ 1,369.00 and the drainage fee is $ 598.00 (TOWN # 6 Dist.), and the TUMF amount is $9,693.00. STORMWATERI CLEANWATER PROTECTION PROGRAM 71. City of Lake Elsinore has adopted ordinances for storm water management and discharge control. In accordance with state and federal law, these local storm water ordinances prohibit the discharge of waste into storm drain system or local surface waters. This includes non-storm water discharges containing oil, grease, detergents, trash, or other waste remains. Brochures of "Storm water Pollution, What You Should Know" describing preventing measures are available at City Hall. PLEASE NOTE: The discharge of pollutants into street, gutters, storm drain system, or waterways -without Regional Water Quality Control Board permit or waver - is strictly prohibited by local ordinances and state and federal law. AGENDA ITEM No.~;l PAGE ~OF 9 - - CITY OF ~~ LAKE ,6,LSiNORI: ~ DREAM EXTREME ACKNOWLEDEGEMENTOFDRAFT CONDITIONS RE: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 408 NORTH LEWIS STREET (APN: 374-032-007). I hereby state that INJe acknowledge the draft Conditions of Approval for the above named project. INJe understand that these are draft conditions only and do hereby agree to accept and abide by all final conditions prescribed by the City of Lake Elsinore staff, as set forth in the attachments to the approval letter that will be sent after final project approval. All final conditions shall be met prior to issuance of permits or prior to the first Certificate of Occupancy, or otherwise indicated in the Conditions, subject to the approval of the Community Development Director of the City of Lake Elsinore. Date: 9,/2-747 Applicant's Signature: /L",,-(, e.4.p~ V Print Name: ~/ G..~dcr Address: bIn 7_ u~&r.J4.u./;us'l .b<l1-fIe.. d<;jj~d CA. 9:z...>~ Phone Number: ,~) 27f'v ,?p I g 951.674.3124 130 S. MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE. CA 92530 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE d--~ y OF (p cr WWW.lAKE-ElSINORE.ORG ATTACHMENT NO.4 ;..GENDA ITEM NO. \..{ PAGE 30 OF fa ~ City of Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Attn: Tom Weiner May 29,2007 RE: 408 North Lewis Street (APN: 374-032-007) Mr Weiner, I would like to address a few issues with regards to the project located at 408 North Lewis Street. While I am not trying to stop Mr Cesar from building on his lot, we would like Mr. Cesar to acknowledge the existence of the surrounding residents and the impact on our property and property values. At the time the lot was purchased by Mr. Cesar it was approximately 4 feet above street level - please see picture 1. The grading of the property to street level was done without plans or permits. A large mess was left for us to clean up from the street after the grading was done. Construction sites are normally required to clean any mess that is made outside of the site but this is never the case with work done on this lot. Between the purchase, first grading and May 2007 more dirt was dumped on the property and it has been re-graded again without permits - see picture 2. He was forced by the city previously to remove the original contraption that was erected with telephone poles ~ a retainer for the property as it was also done without permits and was outside of his property. When we were first made aware of the proposed block wall we had spoken with Code Enforcement - the city was willing to waive the block wall being built on the alley in order to preserve a neighborhood effect. Instead Mr. Cesar insisted on building a 6 foot plus block wall. When the wall was started the back side was done first and we were under the impression that it was going to be columns with wrought iron all the way around which we could accept as it did not destroy our views. Please see pictures 1 and 2 of the view that we have had for 13 years. Now, please see pictures 3 and 4 of our current view of a block wall. Picture # 3 is our view from 911 Pottery, picture # 4 is the view of our neighbors from 909 Pottery. Picture #5 is from inside Mr. Cesar's property looking at our house at 911 Pottery, picture # 6 is from his lot looking at 909 Pottery. Pictures 7, 8, 9 & 10 are ofth~ view that only Mr. Cesar's lot now has - from inside of the 6 foot plus wall. Obviously he recognized the value of the view and did preserve it for his lot only by putting columns and wrought iron on the back side of the property. We also bought our houses for the view and did have it for 13 years. He has now been allowed to take away from the residents who have been established here for over a ACENDA ITEM NO. PACE 7J I OF tL. racr '.~- '. .'- .":. ~,.<,. i1: " '\.ro. ", .i'1r t decade. He does not even intend to live on the property but is simply building on it to sell it for profit. . During the building of the wall work was stopped twice by Bill in Code Enforcement for lack of permits. Since the wall has been built we question whether the proper footings were dug and the overall safety of the wall. Picture # 1 is a 12 foot wall with a 3 foot column on top of the wall. Picture #2 is the footing of the 12 foot wall. Picture # 3 is the wall on the north east comer. The comer footing is built of wood. Picture #4 is a close up of the footing. Picture # 5 is a view of the north east comer standing at the West end of the house at 409 Scrivener. Notice the slope on both sides of the wall. If we have winter rains like previous years the water will undermine the footing. Notice as well that the top left comer of picture # 5 is the roof of the residence at 409 Scrivener. Picture # 6 is the view of the chain link fence on the back of the property at 407 Scrivener. The footing was dug on the property line and after the footing was poured this is how the chain link fence was left to stand - it was straight before the footing was poured. We would like to request some consideration in the size of the house that will be allowed to be built on the property. Houses in this neighborhood are small and a 3550 square foot house would be very imposing and out of place. Since the lot has also been graded so high the house will actually sit mostly above the block wall and tower over all of the houses and yards around it. This will be a huge invasion of privacy for the surrounding houses. Sincerely, Korey & Karen Miles 911 Pottery Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 (951) 245-4610 ACENDA ITEM NO. II pACE ~~-OF- ~9 .~ ! t[ N..~: ~ ~ tl ~ ~ .~~ \) [& N l --' 1 t a ti \U ~ 4 uN [& AGENDA ITEM NO. LL. PACE '33 Of. GP~ . ~ 11 f[ UJ & ti ~ ',\=:1 4 \J Ii C~ ~ t rt ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ & r : ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ \j ~ fl ~ :;r- ":\\ \nl t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t~ T , ~ \2 t \~ ~i ,ti ~ ;~ ~ .~ ~ .- [: ~ /- r'N ~ , ~ ~ ~ !~ ~ ~ ~ , Cl. p/G--ru 1Ze::'d- 3 PA tzA ~,e.&J?H# 5 PIG -r'L.ilZe= '#: 5 PAJZ,qtSi?J?PP;.I #:'5 &; P/e--r-uIZEE..#' '-f ~/ZA ~JZ.A Pi-l :JI:: 5 4 PACE~OF ~ ~ -=: - f'iZO eE:~~"'5> $U t2-t2. oU c-..l l.) 'NC:::\ L{ 0 ~ ~""""-..i \ '5 No-";:: - P\c..-ru tat:.. ~ c..:, L1 0 e. \... ~........-...J \ c:;,. '. \ "S A 60""'; e: ~o~-s;.~ . \-.1 0 \-\OU$'E- S'd \,<.Rou t-J D\..JG:, i-\ 0 e L-E. vJ \ 5 - 1 S 'B\~E.e.. T~A"-' \l..\oo 5~. F='"'\. A .3$Sc:> S~ F'T . '-'OUSE' 's e:..')(.-rI2EfV\c=:. iN AI'-l AR R~(":::=, I tJ67 ~t20M 900 5~ ~-r \'0 l'-\ 00 ,Sac r-r: f, P \ c::- --r- '-\ 12E: CD "-\0'-' SE oN Cfll Pc-rrr~ y s-r " N.{i) ". // Qo9 ,,,,- .II ,\. n(!) "-' II ...., ,,/ 90\ ,\. .' , '101 '5t:::..'iZ l"ENEl=C:. 5 ...., I; ~ ; , '-'04 0 '\.\ ; / 'io~ ...., .II (]) ;{ "'. \.' 4'5 ...\. AGENDA ITEM NO. Y- PAGE - ~ d- OF ( (JC[ d >.' ~ ~ t I:f \j i,,~ tl j N It- Lll "" .:1' ~ i \U ~ { l Ij ; ~ ~ :vP; .\\ '. ,',''''q. '\J ""'i ....}............... :';:"';":. \1) ~ ~ Ij t ~ .t, t ~ t: :t. ,,;i ti ATTACHMENT (""\ \ . NO.5 AGENDA ITEM N01~ PAGE y, OF ftJ cr _ July 26,2007 To whom it may concern, Subject-Property 408 N. Lewis St. I'm writing this letter to explain what happened in the last 2 years I bought this property on March of the year 2005,and since then I had a couple ofissues with the Water District and City's Eng. Dep. at the beginning we moved some dirt in and out of the property because of the misunderstandings with the Water District. I was told by the Water District that I need to fill the slope at the end of Lewis St. See pictures of the front property and sewer plans-Sheet #2,but now everything has been solved with the Water District and City's Eng. Dep. I have approval plans for sewer and water. See the attached copy of the sewer and water plans. Also I was told by the City's Eng. Dep. To get a Eng. to design street improvements and grading plans which I did see copy with the submit set up plans to the planning department. Since then I have done nothing else to the property accept a block wail which I have a permit, and also moved some piles of dirt out of the property which I was told by the City's Eng. Dep. Because of the mudslide problem with the rainy season. I'm sorry for all the misunderstandings Signed a.... ~ t.. (3.." ~ A _ ' </ AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE "-1 ~ OF ~ f ". ,... r 11 N : " ~ W C tl ~ ~ < . ~ ~ < ~ 0 l!'t. N 1 - 1: . ~ If w ~ rt \ll . J 4 ! ~ ~I V \l Q:& ........... ../........'.......... L: AGENDA ITEM N~ '-\.f : PAGE - 4.~ OF -(0 ~_ .j 111-ddri~''1 I ("i." f,t1' q'l."l~. I ji' ill ~l.~..~.~ rp~ ~1!jUUru!JiUi Utblltlli! ~eli ! k!i-U UP 11= 1'15~ill jl;II1fl; ;li'lq~i ~ IH~Sfi fr'm !I'~' p bl'! ~Ii ~~I ~~~W~I~u~~1 L!~di ~.I~lil ~~~U! I !11;llh ~I!I, !Ii; rli~1Jw ~Slll; n! I ~ ~ ~I U II ~Jlil ~ t ~! ~ :u~ ~ U1 ~ ~ !I! ~I ~I~ i ii II; S ! ,I] II .L L . ~, la .n," .u .1. .1 :u .1111. .if.iI .L~ d ~.. ...IB dl .I..s..., III ..1 di .11 ;1... d ~ l ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~~ l ~ ! ~ ~ ~ l l II z ~ ~ ,,~ ~III ~! S Ii I~h i ~ ai ~1o~S! Iii I j II rl 8G0G808 ~ ~ i ~ ~'i i! i I I,JlII ~' R ~I" .. iii i I @@@@ w ~ ZI-gj ---IWZ o::::wti Wo::::w 1-i.J... ~(f)o W g (f)(f)o ~ I- 03=1- ZWCll <(---I~ J:~ 0::::1-0 wo::::D.. 1-0::::;: <( 0 3= Z e;, ~.': J I ' ~ ~' , ~' - I' u II~ tt . s Ii i~~ I~ '\ ' l\, r ~ ~~ \~~ . .... .,' " II i ~ II .. i t 11 I ~I ~! lib ; ~ ~ ) ~, ' I 11 , " . ~"'1~ -." . AGENDA ITEM NO. "...,~~~ PACE 1)0 OF Coer \ ("r:::-:'::: II ! I, " : I I I I I ':;-' '~(,:'~;':'.":' " ~: ~ ".. :g ~'~ Q.~ ~':~:. -gt:; ~ ~ ;;~ ~ i ,,g ~~. JI .... N '0'1 Iii 8 " :s ~ ~ 3i ~~. . of"'- . ....::.:-. ," ~ j % Ii l~~e' . ~ ~ I ~! S 51 ! ~ I hll IjilJn~j eeeeeee ~ d . -II i i! ~ HI ~~ I 111 :~ Ull" - ~ ~ !!! z II1I III, III III III III II I 10 II I l- II I 9 III on II .... II II II II II i :J m II II II :: L.__.__ (I ,\ '------- ~-===-~== r'--7'~- I I I I I ':~:t "..' ,...} ,:7::;'.... \ ~~ ~\ .,~~.. ".. . ". r.". .. ':~" , :'..~..:..~~ \.. .~" . . ....,.'/"~ . 't~i:0.~~r:.~~f;: '--...... .::., .~;..: .. ...~.. ,',!- .'..,- . ......t: i;.1 _ .~.. /:':1~>. t , ' ......., \'-.-7- AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE 1)( OF \.f Ct;Cf JOSE CESAR MARIA CESAR 11714 EXCELSIOR DRIVE NORW ALK, CA 90650 ORDER NO. 507-278637 ESCROW NO. 40124208KB APN. 374-032-007-8 'Lfr o oS- -L:43 DOC U 2006-0216836 03/18/2005 08:00~ Fee:30.00 Page 1 of 2 Doc T Tax Paid Recorded In Official Records Co~nty of Rlver5td. Larry 1./. Uard Asse5sor, Co~nty Clark & Recorder 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 STEWART TITLE-Riverside RECORDlNG REQUESTED BY: '3te",za"rt Title Guaranty. WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: M ! S i7 ! u PAGE SIZE DA M:0Jl SIAF I MISC. ~ A R COPY LONG REFUND NCHC ElWl GRANT DEED ~ C!J THE UNDERSIGNED GRANTOR(s) DECLARE(s): DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX is: $71.50 CITY TAX D Monument Preservation Fee is: ~ computed on full value of property conveyed, or D computed on full value less value of liens or encumbrances remaining at time of sale. D Unincorporated area: ~ City of LAKE ELSINORE, and FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, DAVID BARTON, a married man as his sole and separate property hereby GRANT(S) to JOSE CESAR and MARIA CESAR; HUSBAND AND WIFE, AS JOINT TENANTS the following described real property in the City 9f LAKE ELSINORE, County of Riverside, State of California: Lot(s) 8, IN BLOCK 75, as shown by Map on file in Book 334, Page(s) 40-53, inclusive of Maps, Records of Riverside County, California. STATE OF CALIFORNIA . } . c::--._. ~ } ss. COUNTY O~"",,"~ ~C~...-'.O-..) O~"". before m~\'~~~~ personally appeared ~~ ~ ~~ ~kL PAVID BARTON DATE: January 20, 2005 pct:iORally kR9WR to P1~ (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person({), whose name(/:) is/8M subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that hel~y executed the same inhis/kerl:tkeir authorized capacity(~. and that by hislheFJ.their si~nat~re~ on the instrument the person~ or the entity upon behalf of which the per50~) acted, executed the instrument. . .OI.MAMMRO Ctmmllll..1M1108 ....., NIIC p CIIIfamIe .... ..... County P.ZOOI WITNBS~ official. ""' . . '" SIgnature ~~--..........c.. '- ~ ~'^- ~ MAIL TAX STATEMENTS AS DlRECTEDABOVE (This area for official notarial seal) ACENDA ITEM fW. PACE ~OF y Corr ATTACHMENT NO.6 ,/ AGENDA ITEM NO. If PAGE n OF Ca cr .' . :\,?~,.:'- " ....II!t~r:\1jttt:t;r~\;. :.j:~'~?~< .:':;""'"..,,'1::."';.' ';'-'c '~R~ '.,,;.\ -'"'.\~ ,'".... .~.:~,; ~:.~:! ~L~ :1';; \: "':. ","r: :..-.~:~ i~ ~Jl~ ~~. :~.{; I j "... I !if ~-!. ., ~. ';::' , ,,' '. '..". .." '" :::....' ,,' .. "',,,". :','. ....,...........;:... ...' :',,~:'\"ILa' <,,, ".. n:~i'..) ,. ,':",. " ..',.:. t::..: . " ;." , '/, :.:;:. /"'c, :<, :'~~V~~~4'r' ,.".;,'" ii, ' '"",'x':;';>'i;~~;""~t'~)~l\ i',' ; " c:,';;~~.*;::: · . ,:j~~,~"~~';',;2'~;i;i~~~f;i;;;!&:'" ','f;';:L';" ':/:y:;: ..;'F. ":;~.i' ,,' ["!'.i ;~._~~ i~~.~";; ;:)\.,:, O'A:;'5l2"~~J},";;:.:>:;,,' tv..;' "/'. ;;'S,;t1;:Y;':: : F');~f'7"":;~'t::;ii '.':::~;;;{;<' " .::;;Xi ' <'I"~; ,t"i' :: ,:,.'.' ...' ..' ..' '.' :'. ,.,,:.,<5"/'/{'/./':/" ;i;,.,;;' ....,(,'( {, ,;,:..~..,t~~ Q,,':3.~,;.,~':o;;t.~/,...,/,}.:?:":,., '.::!;';.:,: : ", .../ .....< ';' y, ," :..;,.. .. '''-;::'.: ..", "'. .;-. ;':',' :. f.. . ,! ,', J.'.., ,..' "i;'; ,"0.;> },~:~. ,,' "'it; ;-}~ 'i;",.~r~;~t' :,,' .'.;". .>,.i",'", '" .' ,'." . , ,::)'j~~ ;, ""':'i,, '..' '{,:.:.:"';,: :,~(;i: ,\ '?'J."': '~;,"" .' llif". '" ;;0:-.:, :'>:'..'.> .'i;'./:,. :-;>i '.., '::,:,"''::': .... .,: Y""::' """"'//"':';:D ',,';:',:'_;""::-': ....i,... ..,', ;; ',.,;.:.,.....::....:'/.:,; ':" :" .;':' . ,.>'';i.i.''''',,;';';:;.'::',' . , '; '/.L. ;..: c';.....,..."..;;{:<'...t'. .('.. ....., "', x'ri. ;":';; ".."c",'... ;;:.- " .':: , .c.,' : .'~. . ~ ,;,,,:, .. .' '. r ::,::- ", '. . ,i '. ..:;.. "c', ;'.' :-;;"f~f"" '.J "". " . ..... ,:,~,,,.,.......,'~ ,......"..".; . ''''-.:. ,,.:,, ;:. (":' , :',~:, ....... '.. .,/ . ~~ :~ ,;., ,.... '..:' ;': .,..,:..... .... ,..:,'.,". '::. ..... :. ;: ".":.": .. ',.";; :;:...~:' '.... :.'. \ ." ';'1..:" -"~~: , ':" ~".:..,.,: " ,',' ", "<":''';':. -'.. ,., .,.,".'....>... :'....".. ,""'" ;:- .....j,F "';f.B:'-. "'.;r'~ '1 "",.'. ;...... ...'.' ::.. '. ':':C~!Yht~ El~m6fe . . :'Please read and IDitial . . .~~ij '!f Divi$lon -,--1.~ ~'L~ ~tIleprovi$ions of Business and Jllllfessional Code Section 7000 ct sell\ ':,;u,,~la~e ..' ~1~~i.'in~'~ ., , .' ..1 ~?;;~ ' O!:~~~~,,:~~tbcirsolc~wiIlcJOtbCw . Elt'~~!M .. ..... ,i' :'.~<<!~~)fi!r,~Ie. '. . . 'j\r&ti94:. 1"":':,'\ ~~~~:ii~~W,!;Oit .I! . ',~.; u .< I",:/'!'?:": ';'. : '~,L::.;:j&~k~~6tfmc" . : ~l . . ,'..... "." " ". .",..,...9!'"~,:":,,,,,,;""~:':'" ".' 'Q.lQ~IIIILon.~ ':~~~:).I';<', ., .... :~ ~:::'.'~~'~w~as~ 'C'.> " #~ \:::::" ." fi' '. .."'. .......Id....'th~ tertifi ti .......~..,:.:....;. T;"~~.:.'.':~'"' 'r:." .......,: . :'.',..'." . '~~~.,'" ,..t,rt...., F~_:_?:,"'1:,i .~."d.~"~," ',;...... ...~.~'. ." ~t)l~~;}tf~ ~ ~ ~c ~~~1G:~' ~~~(~~r,~~-;~~;: ?;~ ~~.. !!!I,D at .... - .'- ;.Id',~ J.C~ :~ ~''!:Y- I: ....." i'Zii< " ''*.li<'''~''iil~r:..':t.~~:,..::; :.:?,..,:~. ".. .' .'~ 'li;:;.;~,,:'..;,...~":.....:'.':'~';{;-' ",.. <. _ "~'~; , " '''~''~1,t~1r;;f~ ;tjt'.~t-\<!t:~~l~'~'~,;t';':d'''~ I{h, ..,r.':,::;'" ~.\ :.~,:;:~: '.;: ~'" :~/':';..l? .\~.).. ...':';:;' .:: ..:::~." .'..," , c '.;' ;<;':: :'~' ''1''.::1i~ ..e..:;t:::J2'.~~.::..~.,.." ~P:;?"; ..<....': :.'}iF'-<;~; .:i:;:>;..:..'...... '~ ':'ii....... .. ,i!!... ,~~~.'~!;~..):5N..~?:k~7~i .,'. ;. f r;' ',!,''';':'l(''f,,,,.y T:F~;., '",,,'..,,.'. ":, . ,. ",' /" . .' .. :. . :....../:..... ''';'-/..' ;,4;ft'$.k..:.it\liJ?::::fr9:l-~,!.~~h-~\;;;.~~-- ,~.~: -".; ;~~..'" "'f}," 't ...1 "'~ . :.t'"<'~:~~.j, e~'...'", _ _;., _, ....;}... . ;-, ,'. ',:-:,,::.;.__,;,:.:~. '--:""".<:-n" ,-":-. .; ~ ,.:'(; J\'f..!l,~ :'.:f.'.".~~;....'~,~%..:, ,,:';;~,,;',.~.' .]1,~]~.~41~:~{;..:t;;' ir..-i!":;;".'f'ij.;i.~f~[.::," , 1.7:< f . 2.~)rr;;;'[(>':i,;t'V"'\F:'Wt\f:W~'f:;~&~;,\ii(ikP""r' . ')': . ;', . ,',. .:..' 'i" , .. ", ,'.' . .....<%;~, . .. .. !'Ii.. j''''''''1\i'.''''><'::'d~'-Jlj,,,,,,,,,,\!;, .,:: " '0("";""" ~ ;" :", ,;.......... ... "- . "". c.. ~,-:~.~J;tt~N~~!~~?~t'" ,..~ ; ;'-- , .'Xit .: ':c....-' ,;,>:7' . ..; i':; :':<:.':X<'.':,;, " . "';:;"."!.r""""""~ V~. .,... " .. ~~ ,', ','''".c, ,".. ="..'-""',}. .."......., ,,,"" ..' ......,. {~'T ~~..~~~ttt?,~~.~.::ttt~~j~.f '~~f.;}.{~t ~~~:_:~~::I'i;~~~/;,:){.:::, ~..:~!: ~~.h~ ,\:'~::I:\"'~" ," ,:,.::'- . .',,';:,-, "~ '. ~...."', ,;:"'_"._..}-,;":,:', . "'::"';-: - : ,:"..- < <,' ..~ ~;~I~~ l1fi~J; ," .... . ,.,> Y'" " 'ff~~,:<i'::'<'~:'<;L"'~" " .~ . ',""""')1.,,,, 'cO'""," . ., ! ",~,.., " ... "'?"''': ..".... .... '., .... '., , ' '". ~~f~f~11t~"~~i>"'<I':' :)/2~';:, ';"li., ..., . .'" ,....\:}:,,;.\.;. ." . il1[!~~2~:'W!:~::;~;'...t-.- '/'. " ;;". ":;';' '...... '-.'\1: ,""" ~:<. ~:~r';'.: . .':y :'Z:)'.. .' .' . ....... : ;~~~~JB~f~t;'J~;"t, '. ,',.,>. ;.~;',.:;'." ~'U:':;i~;:\'E :':;1~t?;; ,:'~;::~~:: ,,' ;,':).;:'..:t:C.. <:;" .~:.'.. . ,< :,'.: '." .' ,":,: " "'.. --".;''J:~>,,~~~l:!~~~!~E{i'''<:. ^. ,:':<~; ~.;:~~;.: ~"...~, 'i;,,:"" ..}:':'-Sti~:"'. .::, ",.:",-~,...........",: 4*(i[~'Fj\"'..;"i\. " " ,::\i i )1 Lill. m .'{F,....,: !;':':~:).~;: ,.,,'" " ,;...,~, \:"Z::.~'" <.."" ~ ",~;'..:.. c';iii>~ji~~ "":., :; :~.' ';:-:.~ />:::~" ;:::.:'c~:T;~,/i.';""" ,..[. ;,:,:' ::,,;;;'i:';i";:.- _ ....~t~f.l~~ii:~~~j, "". 1:--' "". .... ,', .. ., "J.." .:i.,i..;':':";>. .",:,:." ... "':' - I'M '1r,:!~,1.\~'~ '. ''':':t?<).tt .;~':::.: ,....'....... :i'" .~."i."",:,:,;",;""";",,, ,,,,. ..'. ;~}J~I~iJ 1st''). ii;;: .' '~i:""i'"',,,,,(,, ,.....j."'..; ........ ".. : 'i,. . '. '"",""',,,":" '. .'i:....iC'f. ....;-,.....:...... ,,'" .~~\;~~1~; I;:;;. . '-." ,.. . ,::.::;~C. :;::,,;;Y< .' ....;,.:..... ,,"" .$.*-<,A;~~;~~~1t;;~,i~f.{0;\ ;/ .' ;.:>}.:;:7:Y' i;i'> ....... ' .'. '::.2';,:;';,0;;:,.','(' , '",," ,. ~,' i!ti'f'jJC. """ ,. "., ":'...", ." . - ..}.... . ..r;",'"""-""Jj,i i'%it;';'\~;'.\'J>;' "'" ~ '..L"....,;,..,.:-- .:: ' .. .~'''..:;;~3~: ;,~~;i~~~;r:cTZ~;.~,~';~i;rT~.r~~;;~\~;~'d,i'-:;~~~}1~>{.;;!;'r';:-ijte/if~~J;;~';~J/t;[.;' ;. . 0 J;;{;~~; ';. '.., ,";',i: ': . .~ . . ~::~~~:~'iQ.':~ ;~itf'~:P\~'~~J~t'~i{1~;!)1; ~q~j;ri;i,ri'~H~:;~~i~~;" ... . . '.' ~lC':'):i.: ;;':.;;: ;;:2,Y;': . "."~m~I!'t.~, ,,_.~ " . . ,.. " . <..: 'M;'j;); _" "....':,'~v.i ;'::1,'>;; ';"~~;-iitr.)~:~':,'i:'v~i'~}"{k'J6:~" ,,' ~,;oi~:.~, , <,~ ~.~<~...~..<i\'}"'e.:> ";;.';;;~H~" : Air,;"~":: . ~;;;':.i "~f ^ '::", ::~" ,. " .""" Z~hh ~~,~. 4'. ~.''';''~4'}^s'~i.~-:!ti~~ I'~{, ~j:v:'~~; ~~1,:- ~~;:~~!;'~r'1s~~~\\":':"l:'i'~; ~;;.:*\,.~,::.r :.,,~,t ,(i"j.if~'$J,,"~.'.I::S .~:{,: :~S~ ~''7,'u, <{~"~'{.:.;:.;~. ~~ ~ 1~;::"'< ,..;y,,~ j,~'h "" 'f:::;. ~ . ''''~'.,:' .'-:;.:-- . . If. . "~.. "., l{,,,\ <~,~~= - "";.,,,:"~,~..;>:tlt:":;"\';'i1>:<,,~:'f '.o~~.. , ''i.!-'''~' '.., "'" ....,., .'..:.... -;;, :~ ~_}t'*iJ{l>;'P:; ~~~(:;~ff,::~~;. ~-:.:i~Dl~l\~r;~ .;f:is~~t~~1fl~1't;~i~;:"~~k~fr.,~~~~l~}it~;tt~',.:;~S..,~~~Ji~~';~i\.;t:'~~;:f,;'4~fi:.I'~:~~ y i~t,~). ~- ~'f:; ',',':;: <"i::,~.:'_ ";.':. y ~/IIr '" > ~"",,, ~,..,It ~~....~;. ,,,, ~w ~ "'-', ,-.. "'...... ~ ~ . p. ,~, ..., "'''' . ~ . ... '~ .. ;~. " , i.."~'i<~:fJ.'fIi" '; ~~~it$:~ ~t!ir1::JJ,2'zft!(~~:J~~~:i~<!~%~t~~57'1Ipf{1~{'f;Jz~;rt;;;'!gJ::;j:~t}~;j~~ti;:"\: ~(~{: '..' ,: . I :,"~ ; ;;.'. . ~ ," - ~ ~~ ~" ~.:: ~i~~~~IT'~ ~~~~~~rJ; :~1;~~~~~ff[~~K~~~~~1~~i~tf~~1k~~1r\~~~~~~1~~r}~;ti~~1;gf'~7~Kf~~~h~~~{0j,~1T~~)~~~Y;~~Et?~~r ?~:-: _ )).,:-;''''' '~'" :~~;: "'" . IA'l'li"l"T'l!! ,;~~ (f'd"" .. rli"",il! 11<;)'1 - -' ., ''''",i1~Y",~;'' 't't"" , "..'" ^ft~'!Jl'lfg}Ji":,c:"" ~;:~t .s~ . ,;a:',.,:fk' '_~i~~E-~~<.t~. t;:~~~lfi.$,_ s;,.:;,~'\t;~~~'iifl:~i1:.i:~[!i9.'" .~,,"i) ~;'\ 'r.}~'/; ~~!t~~'+-~!!~.~!~i(i?~V~~~r~~~,~~~~~.r~~;.~~~i~::.'<: :~ {,.L . ~ . :A ~ ~ ~ "~~~'. ::~ : ~M~ :<~~'~-f>,~~(:?'_.' .:t7i;~~~AI~'~1~j~~_>.. .~t:.. .:'~ ," ~f;$~ '~>>~~*.i-~1~:~i;"Jl;'~~~~~~~~r~~~~;':~~~:j??\~1~.~.1l "~:[~~:;~]~~;~~ j;~~~~~ri1:~:;~~: :'.~ 'p . '.' .... '. . .. ;-:'.' ..', '.~'., , .' ~;:.._" e ~ ~ ~. ',' r .7~~f . }:':i. : !~~l~ ~ " ;)~~..' \~~ ~ .' 't'..'=!.. .~~~ J. .... '&t :;It to ~ ~~)~f<~~~~. ~. " .:. .:~~~'~k " . : l[&{~. ~ ~~t~ji~?~ 1~~;1 "'. ; ^, ~~v .~ ';g~\,if~~j~:$.;';1i;iifti ". " 'ff,N. t~~~1 "f0J.?t:;.~ \;;-lt~'l!. ..1;'. : ~j. ~~~~., '~2;~~ :ti-;$;~~~1i;~1i:/'~ ![<1; '5!1;~ ;}~~;"W! ~":!,{'(:i:':.n"'''' . "'; = i ~ :~ii1?-id4~f;<~~ ~f%~1fif;"~i}~i.t Itiii~l;~. ~)~)~:~'f~ ijf1 :~,.t ~~1i;>!~~tti; .~~ .!\~ ~,;?rg~1i~f~i~~~.'1.{~~G:,ii~:~(~i~~}~~:;.:~ ~> i!$It ~~,'f,;1t(';.~~'J:!,~ ;'. .' 'v. rX~]~;::1,'ij0;:, ..,i,-2r 1j fg!' ._';}J'~' ;~:{.~~ ~ I ,~: ~1~1$;~ ~.~ .- .-, ",.,.,;.;,~'F~..j:''-Sf ~}"'};?{<,;. .... ,,'F'; 'i/. _ ,.;-.;ii:i.:.,.:/i,< .'-';,;:',;.i'\\,'-~j,,;--.. i; " " ~.",:,:.;'.2.>:F:"~'?}:">. ._,.<.'.,.,......,i',..''''r.. ...... ....:,.." ,.,::..... ('. ~ :.S;... }- @. 1~ ~ ~ ~i\i~; ~ Yi~~\~~~~~:~ ~'r H~ . .if;> ~ ;~i~~'~~~~rl:r~~t.~!~ . ;;'~,<J\1:tJl{~~~I~~;{~;~/2~!~~{:c.~ ~~~~f;t~~~;:,1~~~~t :~~~N~;,\; .,,~ ~ ,l:j ,'~'~(Fj(i"il!M~}: ~~0:. %,'-i;3~ ~~~~:;.~; ;'\;-"~\.,..~~,.,:,.,-"";~.iI'''''~ ,~';~;~~~.'_ \,,'.~\"h>t" ,:nw,~ ' " ~.<;~ ~.>:}(':.__I .'~q?'~>::".f:-t_:,:r;~':~r.''':.:~ <.~ , ..i.'.~:.>;""," \.''''-'1 ...".;...\'....../,';>,......'..Moe:.-..~. "OF "A;:;':{..jjl ""/'.':.;; ;..... . .... ........ '., .:.... , , <~ : '-~~T'~:-o;.~",?-,~::,~;:,,- 'f~,~..l.- :.;<-.." .,..............-".... " . . ~.' .:-:.;.4.~!~~f.H~~~:~.~if:':~.r,:i;. SALES DRAFT CltV O. ELSINORE 13 .. 1M ST LAKHLS ,CA 97538 IERWlfli : 4381321133742754 TER~"At 1D : 'l8e8.~81 ~~OU"I . : 'm*.!~~449 UI OAI~~J3~s.U85j87 Tili:. 18:85 AUTH toOE .: 8.6t.'71 City of Lake Elsinore *** CUSTOMER RECEIPT *** Oper: COUNTER Type: DF Drawer: 1 Date: 7/17/0& 17 Receipt no: 30q tp- . A~"T : BeZ .t!i," ~., .' $1"S~'48 /f Description Quantity 200& 3332 BP BUILDING PERMIT 1.00 200& 1B90 BP BUILDING PERMIT 1.00 !\mount I $275.6Q JOSE CESAII 1 THANK YOU. PLEASE COlE AGAIN. $177&3.&7 T. 1 ***cuStOIER COpy m Tender detai 1 CK CHECK 2468 Total tendered Total payment $18039.31 $18039.31 $18039.31 TI Trans date: 7/17/0& Time: 12:12:Q!i H**THIS IS YOUR RfI~IPT**** ''-.. AClENDA ITEM NO.~ PAGE S~OF '(oCl-", _ r Patf!R PrU. 5 Iii ;I = -0 ~ ~ ~ :tt I " ( : - ~.~ OJ -<, <;:0 5~ z~ G>", o Z rt' --~ (j)..- --02- o -z ~. rn LEGAL DESCRIPTION 481 I 1D1111IDf. UIE...... CA _ UITIII .. .1UICIl7f, ......ar IUP IF fU. 10M DC, P11!(114NI, IICUIIIIIIF 8"" IECOIlQ Of __ ClIIIIIIT. CAIINIIIIL API: 174-GWa7 APPUCABLE CODES .. ...... .. lIMe.. ---........Il101 CIIIIInIa ....... CtU (ZlI01 ..1101 CIIIIInIIo........ CIft /1111 CI'CJ, 1111 CldlItmIa .......... CtU (l!II1 CllCI. IIGI CIIIIInIa IIItldcII CIft /IIG1 _,Ull c.ntnIa -., 1!IIIIlI1Mf........., ..........1wIIIags. c...., ... II ............. ..... II CllllnlIa, c..,1II............,.. CIIr CIlIa, ........ ............ ~.- .~'."',' "'~"I,.'~... ~ =:-(-'.\..:>,;;'.. PROJECT DIRECTORY OEYISIONS .y OWlEIIIIEVElOPEI: IITIUTY COIIPMlE&: .lOSE CEUl EUUlQIE WATElIIlmIICT 11172 WlSClIIISIIlIIEET ,.... WEIIIOIE DIIYE &ME EUIIRE, CA t2510 ..0. lOX 101. lII2I Z7W818 WlE EUlIlOIIE, CA (11111744118 I'UIIS PlEPAIEI II: .lOSE CEIAR EVII1III .1172 ....11lIEET 1111. CUIEJ IIIEEf WE EUlI1llllE, CA 1211. 'A lOX I80lI 0 1&121 27Wl111 lAlIE _ORE, CA 12111...oaa C'!'l (111117.....14. 1-111 IOVEINlII AlITIIOIIIIf: >= ...~ llIIT OP WlE IUIIOIE -US ClIIIPAlI JIll .~ 1181Ol1'1111U11111EE\' 'A lOX C a "'~ WlE&III. CA I2SIO 1IOII1BE\'.... CA 11711 l: (II1117W1M _ 4Z7-zzt11 ~. ~S!! V!IIIZlII ~ .~~~~ ..o.1GI 11121 IT.'~R. ama-11Z1 (IIllJ m.caoo ~ I;lS~~ 0- an --'"' ~ 0 tia D! ~O\ "'< I :zV !2W ~opj~ i e~~~ ~s~~ --j;j ~ SHEET INDEX I .., COVERlET. PIIlUEl:I'IATA 0 IIIfJI.....JIOIIt\AIlIICApE PUll 1'1 A-l I'lIIT .IECOID R.OlII PUIII l!l 0\ PROJECT DATA ~ti< Ill_I: H Qe~ ...... PU1111E1MA1lU: IILD S >-~o OCCIlPIICT IROUP: 14,1-1 ... ~~~ ~ I1:z 11I'E If ClIIlSIIIIICIIII: M ~!~ 11I'E OP IIIIPOSIl: IEWEII 1IACT: - lIT: I Z API: 174-11W17 :5 .. III SQUARE FOOTTABULADONS ~ ....1lZE: (10' .'111. U'Jd1l'1BICl1lOII. . . .... .. ..8,.,.81.. Ff. Iii=. =i DIU:.. !t FIRIT ROOI UIIIIIIIEA: . . 1...... Ff. !ao IECOID I'LlIOII UVIU AIIU: .. .. ....... .... "..... ... . l.05Ua. FT. tllTAL lIIIIT IIMlII AIIU: .. . .. .1,1&$ IlL FT. uf5 1-CAlIIIIIE FUlOIAIIU: . .. ...... aa. FT. i! FIUIIr COVEIIEII POIIlH fUIOI AIlEI:. ..... IUO.FT. ! lIIIT I: . PIIIIT nooa UlII. AIIU:. 1.1.'" FT. IEC8IIII FUlOII Ulll8111EA:.:: . :::::.. ... . ...... .1.11410. FT. 1lITAL 81111 UVlllIIIEA: . . .. t,l721Q. FT. 1lIlA_ 1-CA11A111E R.OOIIAIIU:... . ...IIOIlLFT. EO. ctIICICID ZllII.OOlIIIBI'UIIUUI: ....... .....IlLFT. J&. DAn TOTAL ....Il8VE111IE: . . 1,14110. FT. (4l/.ftI 6tSOA:16 ICAUt AS H01CD )010 110. 060S4 GENERAL INFORMATION ......T mu OF ARClIITEI:1UII!: MEDl18IUIIEII A-1 IIIIL cusa....lIIHnIEHIHT COlIC. 1IlE 10.111181 CtJ ~ '1 /-'::,~:_:>< ~.:.:. . ",:\::>: ;.~,:-i~~:~~;~:.\.:.:.:'.'. ", ;~',~,:-\., '; ..... . " ' ',", 1 :' - ':"~:::.:..,::" " "io.~,iiub~.tO.w~e~tii.q .. . ;;-'::'\"!C"., .~:;~~~.~~ .:, " .- "'';,' ... '. . :... .;,::i;.'N ...~.~;~...~ 'i,.';~t~~'~~~tto... I~ Tl"^" ~ '''! -,,,.. < " . ~;:,j/i8"~' -'''j~' ",,". . Uo," ~k..,j.a-;"'...~.,c,', ".:> ......,,'''..:' ",":"', ...........:.11 ~: Rt J/~;,~~1f;i~.( ,~t:i ~,>.: -". ~'~~f!~~~~~~~_:' __ ~~_ ..:::.', _. :~._.~,,~1l ~~.~ - - ~~~ , P... .' ~'i'~I''''ifi<i''''' ",~li~""..j'''",:,:>, :,'.,' ~ ..r', ',;:,.,.....".::-.... '. " " ,.,.'.':'., '-';."" ""., ; ~!I.;""'."'':'' "',"'~'V'" ~ ',c.",."'. ,,:,,\;.;};;::':~;.;,:",.',:,'.";,..->,:;:',: :,' ',,: :' ,;~,.?J..~", . ;,-.m.~t'l""';,:~mi';\,\:, :~:;m:t~;{ii." "":~ r" '. ',y, . ,,~'r'tJ:?~(S;1t'lk] ." ';\ J,'),( :', ",--.. ":;;: . ,,';t:.; -',' ",' ;.. '.' "~'<h~,';~~' "":",,"",:~,',~,.:.,j,,,,1':' iI;'~~"" :>'- :HC"::\~>' ,-,.,.>' . ":,,'.. ">{/: . ':;," . < ' , .' ,;.' ~,.;;., ~ ~~ ',Yi'ej:l.",', :''J'.,,,~,dol1i~:' .. . ~.'., :~~:.' :' ~. ~ '~:.~;/". ',.; ," ,-. :':' '".:>'" .. : ,~.tft.':'i ~ ~-',wa~!~;:;~2'~:~;'~,;~:~-r~~~~."-~ .~.t>;~;~ ~ f!1,"Kwlllil. ~:;~tv.}t,lM:~\ ';~~~:;;infu~" . '.~:1'.., ,~~.' ~- " .. . ~'._ 2~ ... ~:~;:',_.,< - ',"_ ~ ".".:.' '~;t#..fi.>~~:t~~~, i.. "~~)b" !,"- h.'""}-t_ I" '!l :;"~,:;.:~;{I{:t'~~~'fr~~;l-I.T1::~;\ '\~}b.;~r~;1;t:~~;r(i!l~-t;'i<.i;1!'~".~':~~:',.'1:.":n::':\t.:~~.~.~~; "\x~r."'''~ - '''_::'':'.:, '.'-.:, '> ~.. :.,,:~,i.; J~;r:';.~~~:}~~~~~~~} . ~ ~ !f. /~,~::;~~~1~::,~.l:.t~::~. ~'0;:;f~_~:i~ '. ~;::1;t:i~i~i~Ij: 'i~;;..;{1 ~,;..,~~h~~';./ij~: ,.."~, 'i:;.::~~/t:~y(\'..':.<. ;' h ,~;. ....':/" ,,:...>..:, 'H3i~;",1,{~.;.~.:~~.:;:.?.~}j.'~::,l~,~.~.>'.~,.,:~'~.t~.<.;~)}~. ~ .t! "'.' ~'. ~ t:,.:: . ~:;~,w.-;t. -~" '....:'04 ,..., ~ J'''!:,:' .~.."vt';' ,,-;!'" ;.,,~~"'"i<;; ~!,' :"~ 1:.: .- :.- , .~0:.i1:.~~::d\:.::j ~. w~~...,;,>~:~...:(~~;::~; .... ~'~:. ;:;~:.?:. - -'.~, 'E<."~( _.-c~...,:,i; ,_ ~~,\:.:;_-:,\ _ .. ,,;-:-., o;:,;-:>~'':-1j:::-,.-,~. '":,,;... .,.~\ '" ~.ti. ... t'''' ~.. ~ . '.,~-'.~'-",,: .:'. ;,~:~ _,,:] -~,::',,:'fP.~.;.-/\ ;>J~it: ~':~:_: , ,'- ~., \ii;~.)' ~~( /: ~~:.;'" ",'" .~' ~ 'J' ',\j:-lI~ \;.:. Z,,, 'k':.'~ ~.," ;- _...., _' - M ."..: : r ' ~<.,~,.,;;.. ",-- "'i"3';'~';;:3~;!~, In;:~tfF,~~t..- ii','.' '.": "' Ift'~'~~t:~~,~! . ,_~, ",.. ;:';:'fflfi'-~ ,,' '.. :":~~,~r Jr':':,~:'-:':{)'"7S,~n;:.', ,,\. ..' '-'<';'."""~E~jJ}tG.' i\!1!0i'f" :"J' -. "'1:1 ~,~:::'c:..> i/::. .;,: ',{i, .'. .>,,~, , ,,:' " '::~\~":::'.r:?"',' ;:f/:;: '. <i."':)~f;(" ,::.,Y.t,<:." ';~:" -;\ ,,'". ~.,.,..", """'.,'';-,:'?':,!',''.>.~'.''.?..,''',';F.i,'.'>':'',.'',,..."':.....'''';.:,,:'''.; '1. ..';/,;,,~,,',.'.":,:.;';',.'''.:,..' ,..,.....,.', ';:;-'.'. . ~:\!.i}''-..h.,;",'?;,?:; ',,,- .,' .'. .,f" ' . . "}?:;(";Ji'!":..";;1-Y,{.,,', -"" "."'..' ".",,',":" '..." D""'.'" y..,. ,,~. ':....i.~".' ;"',:' """. ". ~.. . J ' '...":c;,ii:q',',";,'2:'.'5h',} ',,"',' '! :.." "" .....!.:-i ",;,;<;,(., '::c ":'" ,,.'OJ'',,:''',: " l1\',',E.lS/;:; .' "';'? ''':.~1 ,.-:::,: i\' -' ,::.' ,; \~: ,~<:"<:;,,:;J:~~':',,: <: .; ,\,,; ,'j::,-:,,;,')'.',:,,:;::-.: "ii', ' ":.,' ,~ '~<'4'~ ::'!;''',~ ,~ ""f;,,' ",.,-.- :n...;;',",.' !"':N:" ~ix.YC-""'."'" . ";:,,,. ,'....;'. -- . , :"....'..',.,";'.... ,"".:'''.''!' ,,)\':,,>"".0 ,.c.:...,.., "'. ..<:." '" ..~~:h%1't;};;I~.>'<11:,,;.];':,::.';-, .,. ,'-"'<111;.. s,...., .;; ",'. " :;'".' ;'i.:, 'L,:."'..,:.". ":;"oc,,::,".<';x..;.--.',,:;." " ~,",;.., ~~., .;Q;,:'.:.'::':.!Z[Jlii:rtG'~:<';~,'~~' '"", _, ' ';""...,' \/;;/'!,:~t~':':"~;T:7,}::,,,:,,:,,,,,'o;:;J;:C\:;,,"'<:' h:\;: " i, ,':" ":;'lif.~il~~,~ ";;~/;<;:. ..,f'" :.';i:i':i;X"'V2_ .;,.," Of;" '~:>_;,:;;:,:""':','~';:/.r"::~:J(;:,("'f!.'" ""'\ .," ;,;~, .'1<.("";',if,.',',, ;~"' ;:<:::; '.-,""., ,,'_ .,';' ". ..c.',.:.....'.... ."...., ~:': ':;,i.,{t ",.,'. ',:,' ;","',' ", ""': . C->,'-- ".".>. .>,,',' :.. '...."..,.... :, ".\' .' '.'.....'.,.. ::,\ '.-.-, '.-.' ": ,,' - ,.i,'iii"i:';> ,':~::;:~ {;;;~:o," ,,:;- ,,, .i....... "'.":,'::' " iffi ,.t:::'.':;:..:.:: . ,'. '.'.' . ..;. -- :Jl " " ":;:'~~Ji'}rt,:' ~<':,'~.: ~\' ~ ' ~ .. .. ~';1""i~::',',:>2>::,;:};.:.::;'!;'''':::,,:.)'''} :,;: ".':::'~:" - < ": " ~ j .:I:;''' ,'~,~,:!3'~?: :f;~!,,;,"7'~:" ;,','="'~ i~>" .. ", ',,: ""'" .\,:;",::,:'-.:,: ;':" '/:"':':','Y',S';,:'" ::;,(:;:.. .", .w','e',f";,~ ?L',:.'{~.!'7j:.:-;, ~'.;.',:"--:.~..:r '. ,:,{..,:?;:;;:,;,(". '"'Ja';i'::~.}?:7;t::~":,::~:"):;: "".;"'''C :'i"i<<it:.'::.'.':';:'.',.... "l ' n;;:~;'" .-:.. s.~{!n;:;\:vm;;};;:,;,:.~J.;,:',,;;,:,::.. ," .;.\(:~:(.,;;,::...;:<.::);.;,:;f:y.. ,,:,,:. >,.:,'{';':..,:t'.,<:.'\, '..; ~t~ft,';V,:,l~JJtf:;klJ.m: ~',z '. .. " , ~.~tj ::', ,;,.\::"t . ;:;M;:::: ,~. .' ,,:6 . f:'.';:.t,;;: ;":;';::,:~': ',., ;::.~ :L.: '? '...r;~,;z.~.o/~;,'lP.~....i;j':.t.,;.':,.;, ~ eYC""''''', ~:;'. I: ""::'!:;j:("y ". '::{:~:i:. ~;lJ:II ,".'-i.i'" ,.....'.- ", ".".'-';,,,,-:,,,,', '.>> ,": ,,' " '.: ...':".".: '.~' ',.":. '\IJf:{.,~t%\/~:~;TiD ,~~~~ti};~l ,~~~~.~nt' :,'';;::2. ,>'.if?'.< ..':: :i,:<Xt~}:,: .. -'~'~~~;ri~f~;J(:'! z~{~ii"., :{t ' : ,'." ,.',," ,}":\,':'.>;:' " ,_,J~",l!:,,11\ ::&'1;0., ''C'}:" T''''.':.'' .~ ,." .,. 'i:i;~1~~~}l~~l1 J~! t&~~;~~;r;:~:,'" ",,;:7,>\: ,:'~,::' . f' :.l(,\<""~,:'".:..?}\~, ,",'7~i".",?,4""" 1,1' . , ' !Pi ., ',. ' '......J;'P}.]rj;:]:: hl.n:h:~;!:~ ~ .. "" ".,,, -" ",,- ~ t~~~i~!;~1:;~?1t~ {~~ji;&1;~iJ~~~:~. ~..~~i};,::~i~}~ : :.....:' " :~;': .. ..,.. " '- " 'i " }.~ ~ .' ~ :.. .t ~ ~ :~ ~~ " \' !f ~ .' ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ n' ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ > :-':~ j ; ~" ~ 'ill" ii, ~. Ir !<l,' ~ ~.. ~ ti '''_,' '" ""-(!:ity of",~eEl$inore B~~ldtl1g Safety Qivisiop. . pi)$t'Jn ~"pi~uP1iSl'l~ee I I :,~ l,'.'r ,. 1i. 'W.; '. r.~/ f' ;: t ~,- ~="~l.n -i; ... "'. ~ " , ~R and th~ ." . :~~~n: :fqb . .. "ease ~d and initial _1.1 am ~ llndet ~ ~ of Business and professio~ Code Section 7000 et sell- and . ~.!~'!Sin.~~_~ l\J:~:~.~,''- .. ~ :",. . .":',:3 ,:lW_~ w~es l!S their sole ~0Il will do the work ',~~~~-"-" ' ~'Qr.~l:aftof.wijrket1CO iiili1~ ,'",..' "<"'W'''' "."".~."", ......... !.' " ~t~?~:j~l:;':~ ~~rril~~i{~i:. :?~~!€~::1KITtti~ ,~~~~~~~ .. ~ i~ ~-~~.~~~. ~:: ~:;:W;~I~:~~ ~~'~~"tJ ~ .', ;:i;~\j~t1f {~1~;.~~~;); t~11:C~;~t?~,~~;f.::;;il;~t,~~~~r;:~::f.$.~li~~~~~i:::~:~..i~~:'1%1 ;;~tJfi~~:~ri~:..~~v~j~ ~Jt~:~;~.~~~~;.;::~ <.~:~Sj;;~~':,~,:;~: ~:~:~~~~::i!(~~t~'~~;~.:/ ,,:,~~,.,~~;! ~; ~.,~';~~ ,:~ /:1.J~~~ '~'..., ~. .~,~~:,~ 1<-':;1~~~.r 'tti ,. ~ .' ~ J~ ;~~~f~~itt;t1~il~,: ~ ~~~tt~t r~~~~~~~~~ , .' ?~i~:~;~~j~ i"v;il ~~lIJI 'i~tl~!!,;~;.~(r,.."_..~",,, 'to . ~",'il":~;1.;""'itt '>,' ~ I~~~~t{:'~i~~~;':,;;~~ ;;/ .. .' ~ ~~~g;jj1t~; , Ui~~fi~i~~~~]}Brfr ~ "::"h~' ~:*~-'-" ~~1~.;~j ~~~~!,. ~ ~ ~)t, ~1fi ~:~i\~~it~~!;~:~~~~~~~~~~~'~~i~i~i~~.;:j::r~~" ;~. ~~1itl::~~~~~~i1 ~:'.Ji:' ~it~. f~ii~'~I(t1.~'~~" ...J~,~'" ~:- -.' Jii....... ~$!-~. ~~ i,;j': 'i ~i~,.C~::Ij~;~~"K;~'..i~ , ~~~l ~\~~~~~~~~;i~~~t i~:J;t~~~~~~~i{:.i~;t:.~~..~l,~~~~~:;:':;~:~~ ~~~ . ~ ~,.'~." .';;\ ~~:~;;.~~~~~~f:;,~ ,~ .il\Oi '-f,,:, , \.$"'~' ,". "-'i,:". .':':"'--'.".:;' '. '::'. ..t.',.. ":"i"" ,co',;;:' ,/ ;.. :',;, .' :,":.": ',;: p~;-~;'.',~, . :C'. 1~"2:~:;!jl~{;;'iV"" ~.s l/r:::'i; ~ . , 1{~kft~~:';~K:;';~ ~};1";""~';~:' "'^~ . "<",.,,' ",',.':""'-;"."'''' . . ,..,:.,,' ""....':,,)"'{:; ~ ~ r,.~~~f~;.. ~ ~..~: Zg{:f ./';].'",':;S", ...,'~;;J..,;./',;::":..-:,;:i..!~r '~~S:';;Y'i:'t:! .. :'c"} ",;..::::..;,,""'" ri"::' <:~:"'4,:,;:':..,i;:;:" ", ()Lf OF Co q ~ ..iI:;'" .' "':,::'~',~e':c~t.'" - ~..'. " "." :=--:< ',':~ <, PAGE Notice of Exemption y of Lake Elsinore Planning Division 130 S. Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 (951)674-3124 (951) 471-1419 fax Filed With: o Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Sacramento, CA 95814 l8.I County Clerk of Riverside County 2724 Gateway Drive Riverside, CA 92507 Project Title: Minor Design Review for the approval of a conventionally built Single-Family Residential unit. Project Location (Specific): 408 N. Lewis Street, also known as Assessor Parcel Number(s) 34-032-007. Project Location (City): City of Lake Elsinore Project Location (County): Riverside County Description of Nature, Purpose, and Beneficiaries of Project: The applicant is proposing to construct a conventionally built 3,554 square-foot, two story single-family residence, with three attached garages and a covered porch, for a total lot coverage of 2,995 square feet, with a lot coverage of approximately thirty-four (34%) percent. ,me of Public Agency Approving Project: City of Lake Elsinore Name of Person / Agency Administrating Project: Agustin Resendiz, Associate Planner, City of Lake Elsinore Exempt Status: o Ministerial (Section 15073) o Declared Emergency (Section 15071 (a)) o Emergency Project (Section 15071 (b) and (c)) l8.I Categorical Exemption (state type and section number): Article 19 Categorical Exemptions: Section 15303, Class 3 (a) New Construction or Conversion of Small StructUres Reasons why project is exempt: The project is consistent with the applicable general plan policies as well as with the applicable zoning designation and regulation. Additionally, the development occurs within the City of Lake Elsinore on a project site of no more than five (5) acres and is substantially surrounded by urban uses. Contact Person: Rolfe M. Preisendanz, Telephone Number: (951) 674-3124 x 223 Signed: Title: Director of Community Development 4 Of- (a G' AGENDt~, m.:M NO. PAGE ~O Rolfe M. Preisendanz ~ 81()[~l (lPS) 81()[~l (l9S) Nn4 i1.msaNniIlOl1YIIIlIIIJ1IS n ~! I ()[Sl6 Y:l '110N1S11 ilIVl ()[SU Y:l '110N1rn ilIVl 0ESl6 Y:l '11ONlrn ll1Y1 H :n .... UJUS N1$NO:)SL\\ UIIE UTIIU NISNO:l5JM WIE UJUS sw.n N _ '1'1 l:lJtOlW I 1Yttl 1$0/ 1VS1:l 1$0/ :DN101S11 xnmo UOJ.S-o.\U UIHS 6AD3 ~ 'AI .l.011VDlId SNV1d '13dO~JO/11NIt\o '1I0l SNV1d ; : ; ~ j ri ::51 : Ii! ! ; 1,111 ! I iHllt j :r::i 1:11 IIII&:III!! I.. 1,'," f I I !h,llf '" II If i 1,';,';1 !!t · i '1 R 1.111 t !fUl, I I. I I II I I I I I' ~ ill III1 .fl I I I I~!( li~l( I~I( I~I( t;' ~ ~ III ~II IIII H I !il I Iii !Iil I: ill CEil ia!( :r;~:fll.; II n II ~ II I I I I 41- t.. -L__~~_-L_~j~_~___~~~ e: e:e: e:e: e: e: l 1/ 1/1/ 1/1/ 1/ 1/ i ~ ~1 .. i ~ ; ~ I a. ,I, ;' II .. z 9 Q . 1=, iC I fl !! ... :I I i I I ;1 af ! i ii, fi I a = f UI'; ~ I oil E ~ i fla C I ~ I i 1= Ii AGENDA ITEM I~O. PAGE 6 ( '-f OF (09 ~ ~ l!!e Is .....I", ~ ur~ '-flU ~I lOCI ~i! I ~ ti i~ I'r: I I J~;i I ~ g~iI~~ L.. ~ . a:: l~ ~ ~ ~ 15 ~ - h~! *j ~ ~ :U;' j , .!I ~. IE l;illUfJ ad t t 1 i i 1 ' I I. . Ii? If lj Eil "c Ii U!~ ; ~~ c .;J ill Ii I I I !:iI : :I:!.I - ,_ 5'- , If!fl I!!H flldf i n' II H ! I l~lU!!l! z :'5., Q.1l ... cO> ~OI ~rt o::..J c..:: wl5 VlZ OlD ll:! S! I Q. - s II 'll i I" ,t!' I t~1 :(1 i fl. fi r I HII !: r III lIt' - I! ,'j II f "~I"III I' r ; If I' I It I". ~ "r Iii I ! s,. _/ I J ,I. I . I .llil :I~ l if!: flif!lh If : ! HH!j't h;1~1!~IIlI !J!i f illllH,f 'tU'.i HHiJ,! I' sl · I"" I III ' , "i"". III ,;/ t · n'1 ,I:' l' '.. l~h:!ll!h!!'i ! 'liI!lh,. Ili'!Ji!IIJ' f1Ii'!IIHii11n 'I'HI:1:;:! '11!,IrIHfU'ltlf ~ ,." I' Utf I' 1"iI ,II II h ' f ~~~! !hl !~!H: f! I HlH H Ii mil!. H!! I;: if i I . " 'f. I I., ' ",' II It. I I f I' {l ~ >I. I,'; I i. il: II! lal I,h I I( ~!l J :ruJ', ILl[ l . :111 III I.: . ~ ={ I a a '."t I: I" r i J"I If I I i 'I'il : i II iP'1 i Il i~ h Iii 'f ;'f i I II I! ~ t 'f '"ih ~ I' Ih If III !~llll~J '! i~ ~~f! i! II I~l Ii ~!IJ il If! iift' ft Ii:,' II, list. - ,I fJ . I ..:.1. I "l'f~ '1['(' 'llf':({ I' !f I, I ~J!JI !,'I 'III I:lJH r. .H.I It.., .. h~' ~UJ~. I ...1 . , i II I'. l'If,G I ~ If , Ii: I I · If I :,.1 : i II :1 'f I'i ' !1 ~ i ~ III ittf! i I~ f . L I! i hi 11 ~ [ Ii! lll~ i ! i~, Ii ~ ~Il E ! ~ ~II i I ~~n ~ ~ I HI :!i! ii I, JdJf I.:. II if !. ii fill Ii: ~II: rlfl ~~II ,tl'lii tlf U P,itlil !l"tlt I ! il'II,Hi F.{ fiH i ;: r. . ' ., ,t r "." J f' I' J I I II · . ;, , I ~ '1J~ U1ll! t. mI-. I~ ~l':~ ;j).J ~f I~ ~I! ~f1.n ~ ! r~1 ~(f~~ !I':t"~~ '11 II!!! I fllf f I.. I , IJ, I .., I J "I, '" t I .. ,.. . lill... 'I J .. f , .. .II .1 .i .. .1 J .It .I .. .. ., .u. d .. . ..1 JI. Ibm.J lilt . .dJ, lil"~m~ .,lflll alef li " . lit Ir ~f 'I 'Iil~ ~Jd 1:111 I 11"1 ; ...= : II!. I r .II I ~i'l !~ 6 ~ Ii III fi "liF ~ II III! i Iiii'm ! JI~.f iil rJii ;ml, I! '~II WI II 'I i I~ lif ;I~ J~ ;~ ~!II ~IOII iP ~ 1:1111 9p i: I. ~ lIi!J - Illi r.i . . ~ I~ ~,~ :~I '!!,~Ikl~ ~ ~I:L ;~L.~~ AI~I:!!i.~!~L.~,' I~ I ~ r-, (jl I ! I i I ! I I ,Jfi I , If ~ 'J I. . II \ I I \ I . / r ! !~ III 'Ii If~ Ilrl II, I:m I.u ,:n ! i ~~ . ~ " i 0.. b a!~! l I II I! J L IoU ~l it ~ ii ), i ~l '1 )4 1 i 'j ~; I ~ 1'1 I. 15.. I~ I . ill f ~ 'I I III !~ I 'I II!. lIB M ~ Q If ~ I: I: III II II ~ ~ i ITEM NO. 4- PAGE 0;} . OF (f; ~ 11'" .(9 ljQ .2 ~Q ~... r- Q Q :II " 5: 2 .1 'I ~ , , " !! .', i ! ..--.';~.i Ii! lj~ ~6 Q :II " E '. 'II I , I , I I ~ ~ 1I I , , I " " .;~>" '~>"" i I , , , , , , , , , , , , I , , ""'"",-------- i , , --------'1 " " " " " " " " " " " " :----11 ,. I I , ... 1 , I , , ___~-__-J i , I ------1----..... , , , , , rl : i ~:---_l----I--_------t I I __________J : I , , , , 11 " , , , , , ~I 'I :1 a ..... PAGE OF ~9~ PLANS roa. OWNEllDE\IEl.OI'U, PlANS PRUAUDY IY, >- I~; ! I I I FIRST flOOR PUN TWO-S'ron DlJPUX USIDENCl JOSE ClSAI. JOSE ClSAI. I . IECOND FlOOR PUN _ N LlWlS STRUT 31171 WISCONSIH STlUT 31171 WISCONSIH STlUT N LAn D.SlHOIE, CA 92530 LAU II.SINOlI. CA 9Z53O LAU E!.SINOl!, CA 92530 (562)179-3018 (562)119-3018 ~ f~ 81lX-6LZ (Z9S1 IIOE-6LZ (Z9S) lXiZ6 VJ lV0Nl$11 1XVl OESZ6 VJ 1VONlS11 11IV1 O<SZ6 VJ '1VONlS11 ll1V1 111US NISNO~IM. UU[ l11US NISNO:lSIN\ ZLIIS I11I1S SlM.ll N lOt vvsn JSO/ VVSD sol T.lN1Q1Sn lCl1d11<J UOLS-oMl SNOUymJ 1I0llun M I ~ lAB A(J]lfY41~4 SNV"W 'VU01]A]Q/VlN....O '.OJ SNV1d ! . 5 ! I, 5 i ~ , J I ! I l I f i I It'd I ~d II I II ~ Iff I! ,I(!l ! Jq I ~ Ii 1"11 II ,111, Ii I ~0~~ ~ .- ".. '. . l1 iH'.f\ ~::,..i::~ .~ AGE,..D.....ITt;...H~O. - -PACE nl.a'1 OF ---fi2f1 _. .,........,.-...... .. E! 0 I .i ; i ; II E I. I :I=i.~! - Illf~18 _ ~ ~ III i I Hi ; 'I II II! . Ii w 111111111 · ! AJ~ .MNO. (/7q 00000000 PACE t~ OF _ / / / / / / o ~ If) " ~ --l co ~ 1ol. "l~ ~ ~ . I ---... ~--, ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ .. .. Service Commitment Letter # 1740 Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Wednesday, March 22, 2006 P.O. Box 3000 - 31315 Chaney St. - Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 . (951) 674-3146 - FAX (951) 674-7554 Location: Zoning: APN: Phone: 408 Lewis Street, Lake Elsinore, CA Residential 374-032-0077 (951) 471-8365 Fax: (951) 471-8365 # of Lots: Acreage: Tract Map: 1 <1 Jose Cesar 31172 Wisconsin Street Lake Elsinore, Ca 92530 Attn: Owner Will Serve Fees Paid: Paid Date: $75.00 3/14/2006 2388/181127 Check I Receipt #: Water Fees Effective Date 1/1/2006 to 12/31/2006 Project is eligible for service based on the following conditions: Before water service is available to the parcel, an 8" water line extension of approximately 285 feet must be constructed. Connection fees will be quoted after plan check is complete. Fee Description Unit Water Connection Fees will be Domestic quoted after Plan Check Qty o Per Unit $0.00 Total Amt $0.00 Fees per Unit: $0.00 Total Water Fees $0.00 Sewer Fees Effective Date 1/1/2006 to 12/31/2006 Project is eligible for service based on the following conditions: Before sewer service is available to the parcel, an 8" sewer line extension of approximately 285 feet must be constructed. Connection fees will be quoted after plan check is complete. A sewer lateral must also be constructed. Capacity Fee Description Unit Qty Ratio EDU $ Per EDU Regional Sewer Connection Domestic 0 0 $0.00 Fees will be quoted after Plan Check Fees per Unit: $0.00 Total Sewer Fees Total Amt $0.00 $0.00 Total Water and Sewer Fees $0.00 Water/Sewer Fee Payments Paid Date: Check #: Receipt #: Paid: .--'-'-------.--~.-~,-.-----.--....-.--.-..--.--,--.- --.-------- -~--.---- .----_._.._ ..m___... .'______.____ u_...._ _ ,_,__ ._ _.. .'_..___. ___._.. _ .___.____ O'_U"'_"" '________~___ ." __.._._____. Additional Connection Fee Information '----...--..--..-------.--------------------------------------------,.__._~--_._--"--_._,_._---_._"--------~.._.__._--' A water and/or sewer service application must accompany the payment of fees to the Meter Depa,rtment, attl10n of Stella Butler at ext 8222. A $10 service origination charge per new account will bAC>i!~BR'hY8,WNlJ:t _ PACE <0 ~ OF (IJ~ q Service Commitment Letter # 1740 Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Wednesday, March 22, 2006 P.O. Box 3000 - 31315 Chaney St. - Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 (951) 674-3146 - FAX (951) 674-7554 water/sewer bill. District Standards allow for a 30 day installation period upon payment for meter connection fees. Generally, meters are installed within 14-21 working days. The District requires seven days notification before intention to deliver payment in order to coordinate the most efficient placement and/or connection to facilities. Meters must be installed and connection to sewer facilitities must occur within six months of purchase date or any subsequent fee increases are applicable. If water service is being requested, a water meter location stake will be provided for placement on your parcel at time of payment. It is the responsibility of the customer to place the stake on the parcel. The District will not set the meter without stake placement. This quote does not contain an estimate for any engineering deposits or fees related to plan checking or inspection related deposits other than lateral inspection. Please contact the District Engineer at 674-3146 with any questions that you may have. Current water and/or sewer connection fees are subject to change without notice by the Board of Directors and fees will be based on the current fee in effect at the time of fee payment. Please note that all applications must include APN numbers. Authorized b~ ~ Loren sorb' Inspection SeNices Manager ~A Date: 3/22/2006 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE (t2- I y OF . ({)q ~ ::> /3' !! ~ -K ~~!l .a~.8 -l!l ~ li~i; ... 0 ~ill! :> I j i I ~~ 8 ~ ., ~ r~ 0 2!'tSt It,. ~ '\ ~ M ~>-!! ~ ~ ~.f[i~i :> :1~51~ 0 III .l'l O.~1lI4lfi~ ~ A ITEM PACE ~~ OF (O~ ~ <( Irl .+. tiP-II ~ . I ~ i:i 21 c: 'C: 0. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION TO: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: OCTOBER 16, 2007 JUSTIN CARLSON, ASSOCIATE PLANNER MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT LOCATED AT 30348 BAUM AVENUE (APN: 375-324-027) SIME KLARIN: 1551 W. 211TH STREET, TORRANCE, CA 90501 PREPARED BY: PROJECT TITLE: APPLICANT: OWNER: SAME PROJECT REQUEST The applicant is requesting design review consideration of a 1,889 square-foot conventionally built two (2) story single-family dwelling unit located at 30348 Baum Avenue (APN: 375-324-027). Project review is pursuant to Chapter 17:24 (R-2, Medium Density Residential), Chapter 17.23 (R-1, Single-Family Residential), Chapter 17.82 (Design Review), Chapter 17.14 (Residential Development Standards), and Chapter 17.66 (Parking Requirements) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). WATER AVAILABILITY/FIRE FLOW The Elsinore Water District (EWD) will be delivering water service to the proposed project at 30348 Baum Avenue. The applicant provided staff with a "water will serve" letter dated January 23,2007 from EWD. In the letter, EWD indicates that in addition to the delivery of water to the site, there is a standard type fire hydrant located approximately 440-feet from the project site. According to the "Will Serve" letter, the fire hydrant can deliver approximately 884 gallons per minute at 20 pounds per square inch for a two-hour duration (see attachment 5). It should be noted that the Riverside County Fire Department reviewed, signed, and approved the "water will serve" letter from EWD that was submitted by the applicant. Furthermore, Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD) will be delivering public sewer to the project site. The applicant has submitted a "Service Commitment Letter" from EVMWD indicating that the applicant has applied and paid for a sewer connection to the project site (see attachment 6). ACENDi\ ITEM NO. PACE [ 5 OF 2>"] REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT LOCATED AT 30348 BAUM AVENUE (APN: 375-324-027) PROJECT LOCATION The proposed vacant lot is generally located 140 linear-feet southwest of Coolidge Avenue and 20 linear-feet southeast of Baum Avenue at 30348 Baum Avenue (APN: 375-324-027). The subject property has a Zoning designation of R-2 (Medium Density Residential) and a General Plan designation of Future Specific Plan J (Country Club Heights #1 ). ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING EXI~TIN LAND U Vacant Project Site R-2 (Medium Density Residential R-2 (Medium Density Residential R-2 (Medium Density Residential R-2 (Medium Density Residential R-2 (Medium Density Residential North Residential South Vacant East Residential West Vacant PROJECT DESCRIPTION Future Specific Plan J (Country Club Heights #1) Future Specific Plan J (Country Club Heights #1) Future Specific Plan J (Country Club Heights #1) Future Specific Plan J (Country Club Heights #1 ) Future Specific Plan J (Country Club Heights #1) The applicant is requesting minor design review consideration for the design and establishment of one (1) conventionally built two (2) story single-family dwelling unit located at 30348 Baum Avenue (APN: 375-324-027). The first-floor of the proposed dwelling unit will include a 437 square-foot two (2) car garage, front-entry porch, office, bathroom, living room, dining room, and kitchen. The second floor will have a laundry room, bathroom, three (3) bedrooms, and a master bedroom with master bathroom and two (2) walk-in- closets. The net lot coverage for the proposed single-family dwelling unit located at 30348 Baum Avenue (APN: 375-324-027), which includes the first-floor of the dwelling unit, the two (2) car garage, and front-entry porch, will be approximately sixteen-percent (16%). It should be noted that the proposed dwelling unit complies with the maximum lot coverage requirement AGENDA ITEM $" PAGE.d: OF 3-:7 REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT LOCATED AT 30348 BAUM AVENUE (APN: 375-324-027) of fifty-percent (50%) for single-family dwelling units as outlined in Chapter 17.23.090 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). Sitinq The proposed two story single-family dwelling unit located at 30348 Baum Avenue will be located on a relatively hilly section of Baum Avenue. The lot slopes downward from the front of the property along Baum Avenue to the rear of the lot. In order to construct the dwelling unit, the applicant is proposing to import approximately 200 cubic-yards of earth and provide two (2) retaining walls approximately two and half feet (2.5') in height along the interior rear of the subject lot. It should be noted that staff has conditioned the project to incorporate a stucco finish or "split-face" block on all retaining walls that are visible from a public right-of-way. Architecture The applicant is proposing to include elements of "Tuscan" architecture for the proposed two (2) story single-family dwelling unit. The front elevation will include a stone veneer "wainscot" base, stone veneer on the front-entry turret element, a decorative garage door, circular clay vents, windows with surrounds and iron work treatments, coach lights, and a lightweight concrete tile roof. The left elevation will include a chimney with cap, second story patio with handrail, decorative vent, windows with surrounds, and stucco. The right elevation will include a decorative vent, stucco, windows with surrounds, and a side-entry door. The rear elevation will include a sliding rear window on the first-floor, windows with surrounds, and a lightweight concrete tile roof. A six-foot (6') high wood fence is being proposed along the interior and at the rear of the subject property. A stucco block wall with cap and a gate will be provided on the left side of the dwelling unit. Landscapinq The applicant is proposing to landscape and irrigate the front-yard of the subject property. Front-yard landscaping will include two (2) twenty-four inch (24") box "Magnolia" trees, "Dwarf' tall fescue grass, "Irish Moss" grounds cover, and "Spirea Vanhouttei" plants. It should be noted that all front, side, and rear yard landscaping will be automatically irrigated and will include a rain sensor, which will assist in the conservation of water. AGENDA ITEM ~ PAGE 3- OF '3":1 REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT LOCATED AT 30348 BAUM AVENUE (APN: 375-324-027) Color and Materials Roof Wall Finish Fascia Board Gara e Door Trim Stone Veneer Concrete Tile Stucco Wood Metal Foam/Stucco Stone Veneer "Charcoal Smudge" "Gourmet Hone" "Warm Butterscotch" "White" ""Gourmet Hone" "Stone Creek" ANAL YSIS Staff has reviewed the proposed conventionally built two (2) story single-family dwelling unit located at 30348 Baum Avenue and found the project will meet all minimum requirements of Chapter 17.82 (Design Review), Chapter 17.14 (Residential Development Standards), Chapter 17.24 (R-2, Medium Density Residential), Chapter 17.23 (Single- Family Residential), and Chapter 17.66 (Parking Requirements) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) including but not limited to; density, setbacks, landscaping, parking, and lot coverage. Sitinq The total building footprint for the proposed dwelling unit located at 30348 Baum Avenue, which includes the first-floor of the proposed dwelling unit, the two (2) car garage, and the front-entry porch, will be approximately sixteen percent (16%). It should be noted that the sixteen percent (16%) net lot coverage is below the maximum lot coverage offitty percent (50%) as outlined in Chapter 17.23.090 of the LEMC. Architecture The proposed architecture of the conventionally built two (2) story single-family dwelling unit is consistent with the style and design of existing single-family dwelling units within the vicinity. Furthermore, the proposed colors and materials to be incorporated are consistent with the goals and intent of the architectural design guidelines of the General Plan's Community Design Element, in that the proposed dwelling unit, which incorporates elements of "Tuscan" architecture, provides an aesthetic quality that lends to the overall achievement of a well balanced R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning district. AGENDA ITEM 5 P AGE ~ OF ::3'- REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT LOCATED AT 30348 BAUM AVENUE (APN: 375-324-027) Landscapinq The minimum landscape coverage requirements for in-fill single-family dwelling units states that the applicant landscape the front-yard with an automatic irrigation system as outlined in Chapter 17.14 (Residential Development Standards). The applicant has met this requirement by proposing a fully landscaped, automatically irrigated front-yard. Furthermore, the applicant is proposing to incorporate a rain sensor, which will assist in the conservation of water. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Staff determined that the Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Pub. Res. Code SS 21000 et seq.: "CEQA") and the CEQA Guidelines (14 C.C.R. SS 15000 et seq.) pursuant to a class 3(a) exemption for new construction or conversion of small structures because the Project involves construction of one single- family dwelling unit. (14 C.C.R. S 15303(a)). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2007-_ approving the proposed two (2) story single-family dwelling unit based on the Findings, Exhibits, and the proposed Conditions of Approval. PREPARED BY: JUSTIN CARLSON, ASSOCIATE PLANNER APPROVED BY: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, /YJ/J/J DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT/ / r / ~ ATTACHMENTS: 1. VICINITY MAP 2. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 3. PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 4. CEQA-NOTICE OF EXEMPTION 5. ELSINORE WATER DISTRICT "WATER WILL SERVE" LETTER 6. ELSINORE VALLEY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT "SERVICE COMMITMENT LETTER" 7. SIGNED ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 8. COVER SHEET {8" X 11"} 9. SITE PLAN {8" X 11"} /' AGENDA ITEM S PAGE~OF~ ., REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT LOCATED AT 30348 BAUM AVENUE (APN: 375-324-027) 10. LANDSCAPE PLAN (8"X 11") 11. FIRST & SECOND FLOOR PLAN (8" X 11") 12. ELEVATIONS PLAN (8" X 11") 13. BUILDING SECTIONS PLAN (8" X 11") 14. GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN (8" X 11') 15. MATERIALS SHEET (8"X 11") 16. FULL SIZE PLANS AGENDA ITEM 5 P AGE ~ OF 3---:1 VICINITY MAP MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT LOCATED AT 30348 BAUM AVENUE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITt;M NO. S PACE ( OF 3l. RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A MINOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A CONVENTIONALLY BUILT TWO (2) STORY SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT LOCATED AT 30348 BAUM AVENUE WHEREAS, Sime Klarin filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore requesting approval of a Minor Design Review for a conventionally built two (2) story single-family dwelling unit with an attached two (2) car garage (the "Project") on property located at 30348 Baum Avenue (APN: 375-324-027); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of considering and approving, conditionally approving, or denying Minor Design Review requests for residential projects; and WHEREAS, public notice of the Project has been given and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public meeting held with respect to this item on October 16, 2007. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the proposed design for the Project and has found it acceptable. The Planning Commission finds and determines that the Project is consistent with the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. SECTION 2. The Planning Commission finds and determines that the Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Pub. Res. Code 9921000 et seq.: "CEQA") and the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (14 C.C.R. 99 15000 et seq.: the "CEQA Guidelines") pursuant to a class 3(a) exemption for new construction or conversion of small structures because the Project involves construction of one single-family residence. (CEQA Guidelines 9 15303(a)). SECTION 3. That in accordance with Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Chapter 17.82, the Planning Commission makes the following findings for the approval of the Project: 1. The Project, as approved, will comply with the goals and objectives of the intended General Plan and the Zoning District in which the Project will be located. The Project complies with the goals and objectives of General Plan designation Specific Plan J (Country Club Heights No.1) as well as the R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District. General Plan designation Specific Plan J is intended to provide a wide range of housing densities and some limited commercial and industrial uses. Furthermore, Table 111-5 (General Plan/Zoning Compatibility AGENDA 1TEMlO'- '5 :1 PACE .. OF 3,--- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE 2 OF 4 Matrix) within the General Plan identifies that the General Plan designation Future Specific Plan J (Country Club Heights No.1) is compatible with the R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District. In addition, Future Specific Plan J General Plan designation mandates that the average residential density will be 6 dwelling units to the acre. The proposed single-family dwelling unit will cover approximately sixteen-percent (16%) of the net lot area, which complies with the goals and objectives of the Future Specific Plan J designation of the General Plan, R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District, and the General Plan/Zoning Compatibility Matrix. Approval of this Project will assist in achieving the development of a well balanced and functional mix of residential, limited commercial, limited industrial, open space, recreational and institutional land uses by providing additional affordable housing within the R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District. The Project also encourages the development and maintenance of a broad range of housing types for all income groups and age categories. Finally, the Project, which incorporates elements of "Craftsman" style architecture, will provide a well rounded design while maintaining the desirable rural characteristics and base framework to achieve quality and compatibility in the physical design of the developing portions of the City. Overall, the Project will enhance the existing developed areas within General Plan designation Future Specific Plan J and Zoning Designation R-2 (Medium Density Residential) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. 2. The Project complies with the design directives contained in Section 17.82.060 and all other applicable provisions of the Municipal Code. The Project is appropriate to the site and surrounding developments in that the proposed single-family dwelling unit provides: a twenty foot (20) front-yard setback; sufficient front, side, and rear-yard landscaping; and, safe and sufficient on-site vehicular circulation. In addition, the Project complies with all setback, height, and lot coverage requirements as outlined in the R-1 (Single-Family Residential) Zoning District of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, as mandated by the R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District. The Project will complement the quality of existing projects in that the applicant is providing elements of "Tuscan" style architecture, which includes: 360-degree architecture articulation pursuant to the "General Plan, Community Design Element Design Guidelines"; windows with surrounds and iron work; a turret element front-entry porch; a stone veneer ''wainscot'' base; stone veneer on the turret element front-entry porch; a chimney with cap; decorative vents; and a lightweight concrete tile roof. AGEl"!:)"),. rr::..a iW. PACE '1 S' OF-3, . PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE 3 OF 4 3. Subject to the attached conditions of approval, the Project is not anticipated to result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. A Class 3 CEQA exemption may be invoked when the development proposal involves construction of one single family residence. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15303(a), the Project is exempt from environmental review because it involves the construction of one single family residence. Section 7.3.2 of the MSHCP states that: 'Tdjevelopment of individual single-family homes on existing parcels, in accordance with existing land use regulations is a Covered Activity within the Criteria Area," subject to an expedited review process. Impacts of development of single-family residences on sensitive habitat and covered species were accounted for in the MSHCP and the MSHCP EIR. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the single-family residence at 30348 Baum Avenue (APN: 375-324-027) was sited on the least sensitive portion of the lot. Consideration was given to access, topography/terrain, zoning standards including setbacks, soil types, presence of earthquake fault lines, leach fields, presence of oak trees and high fire hazard areas. The building foot print area is appropriate and complies with the MSHCP Criteria Area. Moreover, the Project has been reviewed by all City divisions and departments, which have imposed certain conditions of approval on the Project to ensure that no adverse impacts occur including conditions; which will insure that adequate water and fire protection is available. In light of those conditions of approval, as well as the design features of the Project itself, the Project will not have a significant effect on the environment. 4. 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 Project to ensure development of the property in accordance with the objectives of Chapter 17.82. Pursuant to Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Section 17.82.070, the Project has been scheduled for consideration and action of the Planning Commission. The Project has also been conditioned to comply with all aspects of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. The Applicant shall meet all required setbacks and development standards pursuant to the R-1 (Single-Family Residential) zoning designation as mandated by the R-2 (Medium Density Residential) zoning district. SECTION 4. Based upon the evidence presented, the above findings, and the conditions of approval, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Minor Design Review application. ACEKU}'" ':';[;Jl NO. PACElO 5 OF ~ ':l PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE40F4 SECTION 5. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of October 2007, by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: Rolfe Preisendanz Director of Community Development Michael O'Neal, Chairman City of Lake Elsinore AGENDA !TEf',~ NO. PACE (( j OF--3 L CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PROJECT NAME: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF A CONVENTIONALLY BUILT TWO (2) STORY SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT LOCATED AT 30348 BAUM AVENUE (APN: 375- 324-027) PLANNING DIVISION GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. The applicant shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its Officials, Officers, Employees, and Agents from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City, its Officials, Officers, Employees or Agents to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning the Minor Design Review of a conventionally built two (2) story single-family dwelling unit located at 30348 Baum Avenue (APN: 375-324-027) project attached hereto. 2. The decision of the Planning Commission shall be final fifteen (15) days from the date of the decision, unless an appeal has been filed with the City Council pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 17.80 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. 3. If the project proposes an outdoor storage tank, the applicant shall locate the unit within the side or rear yards. If the location must be within the front yard, the applicant shall provide a method of screening subject to the review and approval of the Director of Community Development or his designee. 4. Minor Design Review approval of the conventionally built two (2) story single- family dwelling unit located 30348 Baum Avenue (APN: 375-324-027) will lapse and become void one (1) year of the approval date unless a building permit is issued and construction commenced and the project is diligently being pursued toward completion. 5. All Conditions of Approval shall be reproduced upon page one of building plans submitted to the Building and Safety Division for Plan Check. 6. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, the applicant shall sign and complete an "Acknowledgement of Conditions," and shall return the executed original to the Community Development Department for inclusion in the case records. 7. All materials and colors depicted on the plans and materials board shall be used unless modified by the Applicant and approved by the Community Development AGENDJ\ I'rE;'J~ NO. PACE I 'J-. 5 OF 3-::J Director or designee. 8. All site improvements shall be constructed as indicated on the approved site plan and elevations, with revisions as noted herein. The applicant shall meet all required setbacks, and development standards pursuant to the R-1 (Single- Family Residential) development standards. Any revisions to the Minor Design Review attached hereto shall be processed in a similar manner as the original Minor Design Review. All plans submitted for Building Division plan check shall conform to the submitted plans as modified by the Conditions of Approval. 9. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Riverside County Fire Department. 10. All windows shall use foam surrounds and/or other architectural-type features approved by the Community Development Director or designee. 11. All necessary exterior/ancillary equipment shall be effectively screened from public view. All proposed screening methods shall be reviewed and approved the Community Developer Director or designee. 12. All roofing materials shall have a minimum Class "An Fire rating, and so noted on the construction plans. 13. The Applicant is to meet all applicable City Codes and Ordinances. 14. A cash bond of $1 ,000.00 shall be required for any construction trailers placed on the site and used during construction. Bonds will be released after removal of trailers and restoration of the site to an acceptable state, subject to the approval of the Community Development Director or designee. 15. The Applicant shall comply with the City's Noise Ordinance. All construction activity shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 AM to 5:00 PM, Monday through Friday, and no construction activity shall occur on Saturdays, Sundays or legal holidays. 16. The 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 control techniques. Interim erosion control measures shall be provided thirty (30) days after the site's rough grading, as approved by the City Engineer. 17. Any exterior air conditioning or other mechanical equipment shall be ground mounted and screened so that they are not visible from neighboring property or public streets. Air conditioning units and related equipment may not encroach more than two-feet (2') into the required minimum side yard setback. t-~G[i.DA "..i M). 5 PACE ("3 OF 3, 18. Garages shall be constructed to provide a minimum interior clear space of twenty feet (20') x twenty feet (20') for two cars. 19. The Applicant shall provide shrubs and plant materials as shown on the landscape plan. Any changes to this plan shall be subject to the approval of the Community Development Director or designee. The landscape plan improvements and plantings shall be fully installed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 20. Planting within fifteen feet (15') of ingress/egress points shall be no higher than 36 inches. 21. Driveways shall be constructed of concrete per Building and Safety Division standards. 22. All walls or fences located in any front yard shall not exceed thirty-six inches (36") in height with the exception that wrought-iron fences may be five feet (5') in height. Chain link fences shall be prohibited. 23. The applicant shall be required to remove and replace any existing chain link fencing and any fencing that is in poor condition. It will be the responsibility of the applicant to contact the effected neighboring property owners. If the existing fencing is in good condition, this requirement may be waived per the approval of the Community Development Director or Designee. 24. The applicant shall provide a flat concrete pad a minimum of 3'- 0" by 7'- 0" adjacent to each dwelling unit. The storage pad for trash barrels shall be concealed from public view. 25. The applicant shall submit a check in the amount of $64.00 made payable to the County of Riverside for a Notice of Exemption. The check shall be submitted to the Planning Division for processing within 48 hours of the projects approval. 26. The applicant shall place a weatherproof 3' x 3' sign at the entrance to the project site identifying the approved days and hours of construction activity and a statement that complaints regarding the operation can be lodged with the City of Lake Elsinore Code Enforcement Division (951) 674-3124. The sign shall be placed on the property prior to the issuance of a grading permit and/or building permit; which ever occurs first. 27. All exposed retaining walls visible from any public right-of-way shall utilize "split- face" block or stuccoed to match the proposed dwelling unit. Plain precision block is not permitted. AGEi;~Dj\ iTi::.';! r~o. PAGE~OF 5 3~ 28. The applicant is to meet all requirements of the Lake Elsinore Unified School district. 29. The applicant is to meet all requirements of the City of Lake Elsinore Redevelopment Agency. 30. The applicant is to meet all requirements of the Building and Safety division. 31. The applicant will be responsible for landscaping all required dedications or easements until such time that all street improvements are constructed. 32. All walls and/or fencing need to be located off the property line and so indicated on the construction plans. If the Applicant proposes to place any walls and/or fencing on the property line he/she must submit a notarized agreement between the subject property owner and the adjacent property owner to the Planning Department prior to issuance of a building permit. 33. The project shall comply with any/all requirements of the City of Lake Elsinore Building and Safety division. 34. The project shall comply with any/all requirements of the City of Lake Elsinore Parks and Recreation Department. 35. The project shall comply with any/all requirements of the Lake Elsinore Police Department. 36. The project shall comply with any/all requirements of the City of Lake Elsinore Redevelopment Agency. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS 37. The applicant shall provide assurance that all required fees to the Lake Elsinore Unified School District have been paid, prior to issuance of building permits. 38. The applicant shall pay park-in-lieu fees in effect at the time, prior to issuance of building permits. 39. The applicant shall pay the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Fee (MSHCP) Local Development Mitigation Fee (fee for density less than 8 du/ac), prior to obtaining building permits. 40. The applicant shall pay all applicable Library Capital Improvement Fund fees, prior to the issuance of a building permit. 41. Prior to the issuance of any building permit for the Project, the Developer shall ~,"", '"DA ,,~."" " f',,\ 5 ,.;,lll;;i\l' . Ii t:iii !~v. _ PAGE 'Is OF 3/ enter into an agreement with the City and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Lake Elsinore to provide (a) 15% of the units constructed in the Project as affordable housing units in accordance with the requirements of Section 33413(b )(2) of the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health & Safety Code Sections 33000 et seq.), or (b) an alternative equivalent action as determined by the City which may include (without limitation) dedication of vacant land, construction of affordable units on another site, or payment of an in-lieu fee at the rate of $2.00 per square-foot of assessable space for each dwelling unit in the Project. For purposes of this condition, "assessable space" means all of the square-footage within the perimeter of a structure, not including any carport, walkway, garage, overhang, patio, enclosed patio, detached accessory structure, or similar area. The amount of the square-footage within the perimeter of a residential structure shall be calculated by the building department of the City in accordance with the standard practice of the City in calculating structural perimeters. 42. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide assurances to the Planning Division that all sewer arrangements have been met. 43. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide a detailed sewer will serve letter from the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. The sewer will serve letter submitted to the Community Development Department shall have been generated no longer than thirty (30) days prior to submittal. 44. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant is to provide assurances to the Community Development Department that all requirements of the City of Lake Elsinore's Parks and Recreation Department have been met. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICA TE OF OCCUPANCY 45. The applicant shall provide an irrigation system for landscaped areas onsite as shown on the landscape plans. The irrigation system shall be fully installed and operational prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 46. The Applicant shall provide a rain sensor as shown on the landscape plan. The rain censor shall be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 47. All exposed slopes in excess of three feet (3') in height shall have permanent irrigation system and erosion control vegetation installed, as approved by the City's Landscape Architect. A Planting and Irrigation Plan shall be submitted, approved and planted prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Fees are required for review of plans and inspections. 48. The building address shall be a minimum of four inches (4") high and shall be easily visible from the public right-of-way. Care shall be taken to select colors AGENDA iTEI\~ NO. S- PACE I ~ OF~~--<"- and materials that contrast with building walls or trim. Installation of building address shall be done prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 49. The applicant shall meet all Conditions of Approval prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and release of utilities. GENERAL 50. All Public Works requirements shall be complied with as a condition of development as specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), prior to the issuance of a building permit. 51. The applicant shall process and meet all parcel merger requirements, prior to the issuance of a building permit. The applicant shall submit merger documents along with grading plans and approved prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 52. The applicant shall submit a "Will Serve" letter to the City Engineering Division from both water agencies stating that both water and sewer arrangements have been made for this project and specify the technical data for the water service at the location. such as water pressure and volume etc. The applicant shall submit this letter prior to applying for a building permit. 53. The applicant shall submit a "Non Interference Letter" from Southern California Edison, prior to issuance of Grading Permit. Edison's contact person is Lisa Salinas at 14799 Chestnut Street, Westminster CA. 92683, and her telephone number is (714) 934-0838. 54. All arrangements for relocation of utility company facilities (power poles, vaults, etc.) out of the roadway or alley shall be the responsibility of the property owner or his agent. 55. The applicant shall provide fire protection access and facilities as required in writing by the Riverside County Fire Department. 56. In accordance with the City's Franchise Agreement for waste disposal & recycling, the applicant shall be required to contract with CR&R Inc. for removal and disposal of all waste material, debris, vegetation and other rubbish generated during cleaning. demolition, clear and grubbing or all other phases of co n stru ction. 57. All grading and street improvement plans submitted to engineering shall be drawn on 24" x 36" Mylar and be set into City's specifiC border and title block and include city specific general notes for grading or street improvements respectively. Digital files for the border and the notes are available by request to "agutierrez@lake-elsinore.org". ACEND,\ iTEM NO. S' PACE I -, OF 3-"1 DEDICA TION 58. The applicant shall dedicate a ten-foot slope easement or right of way along Baum Avenue and property line for future street alignment, prior to the issuance of a building permit (Res. 87-64). 59. All public right-of-way dedications shall be prepared by the applicant or his agent. Deeds shall be submitted to the Engineering Division for review and approval and recordation, prior to the issuance of a building permit. STREET IMPROVEMENTS 60. All work done under an encroachment permit for off-site improvements of utility lines shall be delineated on the street improvement plans and approved and signed by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of a building permit. 61. The applicant shall pay all fees and meet requirements of an encroachment permit issued by the Engineering Division for construction of off-site public works improvements (LEMC12.08, Res.83-78). All fees and requirements for an encroachment permit shall be fulfilled before the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. GRADING 62. The developer shall obtain all necessary off-site easements for off-site grading from the adjacent property owners, prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 63. The applicant shall apply and obtain a grading permit with appropriate security, prior to any grading activity. 64. A grading plan stamped/signed by a California Registered Civil Engineer is required if the sum of the cut and fill in grading exceeds 50 cubic yards and the existing drainage flow pattern is substantially modified as determined by the City Engineer. The grading plan shall show volumes of cut and fill, adequate contours and/or spot elevations of the existing ground as surveyed by a licensed surveyor or civil engineer. All contours shall extend to minimum of 15 feet beyond property lines to indicate existing drainage pattern. The applicant shall apply and obtain a grading permit with appropriate security prior to grading permit issuance. 65. The applicant shall provide soils; geology and seismic report, as part of this report address the requirement of the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. The applicant shall provide a final soils report showing compliance with recommendations. 66. The applicant is to provide erosion control measures as part of their grading plan. AGEr~Di4. ITEM NO. 5 PACE t e OF ~ I The applicant shall contribute to protection of storm water quality and meet the goals of the SMP in Supplement "A" in the Riverside County NPDES Drainage Area Management Plan. 67. All grading shall be done under the supervision of a geotechnical engineer and he shall certify all slopes steeper than 2-to-1 for stability and proper erosion control. The geotechnical engineer shall make recommendations for the minimum distance of building foundation to the top and toe of slopes. DRAINAGE 68. On-site drainage shall be conveyed to a public facility, accepted by adjacent property owners by a notarized letter of drainage acceptance, or conveyed to a drainage easement. 69. All natural drainage traversing the site shall be conveyed through the site, or shall be collected and conveyed by a method approved by the City Engineer. 70. All roof drains shall not be allowed to outlet directly through coring in the street curb. Roofs shall drain to a landscaped area. All driveways shall be sloped to drain into landscaping prior to entering street facilities 71. The applicant shall submit, along with grading plans, Hydrology and Hydraulic Reports for review and approval by City Engineer. The developer shall mitigate any flooding and/or erosion downstream caused by development of the site and/or diversion of drainage. FEES 72. The applicant shall pay all Capital Improvement and Plan Check fees (LEMC 16.34). The current traffic mitigation fee is $1,369.00; the current drainage fee is $359.00 (Town No. 6 Dist.) and the current TUMF amount is $9,693.00; the amount of fees shall be adiusted accordinq to the fee schedule current at the time of payment. 73. The applicant shall provide in-lieu payment for future off-site public improvements prior to building permit. (Res. 86-35) In-lieu payment shall be calculated by developers' engineer or architect and submitted for City Engineer's approval. The estimate shall be based on current cost of street improvements from property line to centerline of the street within the property limits, plus a 15% added cost for engineering and construction administration. The street improvements shall include 6' wide concrete sidewalk and curb and gutter, and 3" AC over 5" AS pavement section to center line of the street. ,/ riE,,\ NO. S PAGE~Of 3, STORMWA TER! CLEANWA TER PROTECTION PROGRAM 74. The City of Lake Elsinore has adopted ordinances for storm water management and discharge control. In accordance with state and federal law, these local storm water ordinances prohibit the discharge of waste into storm drain system or local surface waters. This includes non-storm water discharges containing oil, grease, detergents, trash, or other waste remains. Brochures of "Storm water Pollution, What You Should Know" describing preventing measures are available at City Hall. PLEASE NOTE: The discharge of pollutants into street, gutters, storm drain system, or waterways -without Regional Water Quality Control Board permit or waver - is strictly prohibited by local ordinances and state and federal law. AGENDA iTEM NO. S- PACE ;l 0 OF "7?., .~ CITY OF ~ LAKB ,6ILSiNORf Y DREAM EXTREMElY Notice of Exemption Filed With: o Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Sacramento, CA 95814 I2S] County Clerk of Riverside County 2724 Gateway Drive Riverside, CA 92507 Project Title: :Minor Design Review of a single-family dwelling unit located at 30348 Baum Avenue (APN: 375-324-027). Project Location (Specific): The proposed vacant lot is generally located 140 linear-feet southwest of Coolidge Avenue and 20 linear-feet southeast of Baum Avenue at 30348 Baum Avenue (APN: 375-324-027). Project Location (City): City of Lake Elsinore Project Location (County): Riverside County Description of Nature, Purpose, and Beneficiaries of Project: A Minor Design Review for a two-story single-family dwelling unit with an attached two (2) car garage located at 30348 Baum Avenue. The subject property has a Zoning designation of R-2 (Medium Density Residential) and a General Plan designation of Future Specific Plan J (Country Club Heights #1). Furthermore, the proposed project will have a net lot coverage of approximately sixteen-percent (16%). Name of Public Agency Approving Project: City of Lake Elsinore Name of Person / Agency Administrating Project: Justin Carlson, Associate Planner, City of Lake Elsinore Exempt Status: o :Ministerial (Section 15073) o Declared Emergency (Section 15071 (a)) o Emergency Project (Section 15071 (b) and (c)) [8] Categorical Exemption (state type and section number): Article 19 Categorical Exemptions Section 15303, New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures Reasons why project is exempt: This project meets the requirements pursuant to Section 15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Contact Person: Justin Carlson, Associate Planner Telephone Number: (951) 674-3124 x 295 Signed: Title: Director of Communit;y Development Rolfe M. Preisendanz PAGE (7- l 5"- OF '3-' AGEND}'.:\ ITa'll r~o. !!'. ;J~, ~.,.- Date of Request Owner's Name Mailing Address CityfStatelZip Contact Name TracklLotIBlock Street Address Type of Request Residential 1-23-07 APPROVAL ELSINORE WA TER DISTRIC.,RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DI!PAR.TMENT . b~loor-- WATER WILL SERVE LETTER REQUEST c>>~CIfI:..ISD6UG BLOOM, FSS ~~~~~~p~~~:t!~p~;;;l- V~~YEAR - SUBJECT TO COlt . I APPLICABLE CODBS ~cC>>l.Int# OWner's Phone # . Sime Klarin 1551 W. 211th. Sl Torrance. Ca. 90501 Sime Klarin Contact's Phone # APN# 30348 Baum Ave. 310-508-0740 375-324-027 x Commercial Other Type New Construction x RemOdel Received: Date Initials Comments Grant Deed Preliminary Title Report Plans of Addition (Remodels Only) Payment Check # " Date Field Check: Remodels: Size of Main line ~ Location of Main Line Street in front of Darcel Served by Hydro Tank ~ Within Easement Zone . Backflow Device Needed Tvee Static water pressure less than 45 psi Static water pressure greater than 90 psi 125# Meter Size Location Customer Shut Off Fire Service Street Lateral Size & Materials Building Lateral Size & Materials Engineering Date Sent Date Approved by Engineering :::: ~~ 2. -12.--<> ') A -1<..-01 FINAL WILL-SERVE LETTER ISSUANCE: Date PreDared Will Serve Issued L. ~ lL- D, Conditions of Will-Serve, if applicable: Date to Customer ~ -/"l--()1 AGENDA ITEM NO. 5' PACE. d ~ ..OF .3 t - -' "MAINTENANCE 37 - FLOW TEST REPORT location -'Bt\u.~ Ilvt:.. 4.)'C.s.I of ~~e.s Date :l- ~C(-O '7 g dt!) A-M. Test Made by H lc..f!~lE..f I1LJSI tEe- t=. W /1 Ko B~ F~6-0s'o D ~~/Ne TIme Representative 01 Witness ,). State Purpose 01 Test hu -FJ;w . Consumption Rate During T~st rr Pum~ Affect Test. Indic.Ue Pumps Operating' Flow Hydrants 'I J.-'A. '" " /S.#= rnsD (;+1'-\. I t..$""' .:t:J:::- Residual B AI A2 A;s Siz~ Nozzle Pitot Reading Total gpm gpm Fl=- e;..s ' Static, B psi' psi Projected Results: at 20 psi Residual 8~ y gpm: or at ' psi Residual gpm R.=~, J ,. '~U> '5Y _; Ias-IS~ _ jJ.3~ _' . @)::i=- C~s-~-~--(pot,~.~- ~O( ~,~1- g~i~~1 1J'psl LocatiOll Map: Show line sizes and distance to next cross connected tine Show valves and hydrant branch size. Indicate North, Show Uowing hydrants-label AI. A2. A3. Show location 01 Static and Residual-label B Indicale B HYdrant. '/.. Sprinkler Othel (identitYI 19ure 5-4 Row-test report. ~ '3, P.GENDA \TEM NO. PACE O~ OF BOl tc)..... l&'\ ~ CC k ~1~1~ r. - . f ~ ~ :: ~ 0.. -' 0;" if I: :t .. i .. . " ~ .. ~.. :: II" .. ...:~ t- ... .;'" .... ~.: Q ~ ~.. ~ It''' "3j .....~ I~ ',;, .. ~~ .. .. II.. .. .. . : Ii ~ '11 Ii ~It ;~ E~ ::' .. ~ ;j , .. .. ~l; .... .. .... ~ S,S~ ~ I ~ . '.. .. ~ o >- C). z ~ .. .... ~ W J{]N3A~ r .J07 xv -N. @ J2. ;:I: ~~ ~ ~~ @ t .. ~ ~ ~ () ~ 0,; ~ ... ~ .. !:! ~ '- " ~ .. ~ .. ~ ~ l:l ~ ... o !'): ~ l:. .~ ~~ ....~ ~~ ~~ i ) j 1 1 :! " ., oJ 1 i { .~ d :j i :1 ;j "l ~ , , ~ ~ . . -< i 1 '. .. .. ; :i J ... i ..~ " (-) ; . :! { ~ ~ ~ I. : ~ - ~nl .\ Ir) (.) .. ~;),.," : I\.~ ~ ~ ~ ltj , '" ~~ {3 ~" "11 ~. . 'i~ o Description: Riverside,CA Assessor Map 375.32 Page: 1 or 1 Order: 1 COZIIIII6Dt: ~ AGENDA ITEMf'JO. S PACE-2LOF '3, FORM B . Page 1 Name APN Sime K1arin 37s..324-027 PUBLIC WATER SERVICE CERTIFICATION This certifies that the above referenced property is within the service area boundaries of this water service utility and that: Service infonnation: (Check one) x There are currently existing adequate source, storage and distribution line capacities to provide potable water to the referenced site in sufficient quantities to satisfy the domestic water service and fire protection requirements of the proposed use. The water mains to serve each proposed.service connection are currently installed and operable. Financial arrangements have been made to install water mains for each proposed. service outlet and any other necessary facilities to insure that the proposed use will have adequate source, storage and distribution line capacities for each proposed.service connection that will satisfy the domestic water service and fire protection requirements of the proposed use. It is financially and physically feasible to install water service facilities that will provide adequate source, storage and distribution line capacities for each proposed service connection that will satisfy the domestic water service and fire protection requirements of the proposed use. Easement Information: (Check one) X This agency has no known water lines or easements on the subject property line. This agency has water lines and/or easements on the subject property but they do not conflict with the proposed use as currently designed. This agency has waterlines and/or easements on the subject property which conflict with the proposed project as currently designed. Applicant must revise plans and resubmit them to this agency for approval. Fire Flow Infonnation: 884 Gallons per minute at 20 pounds per square inch for a minimum two-hour duration. A Standard Tvpe hydrant is located 440' feet from the above referenced parcel. On Baum Ave. West of Gutkaes Ave. . AGENDA ITEM NO._C PACE d 5 . OF _"""3 -:L~ o 0> !iT ~ c: ~ ~ 3: ~ ~ ~ 5l. ~ lD iil a: lD Gl p; '5'~Cl::' '" 0'1Cl .... ~ ::-t ~p8 ~~,~ '" m3 cdi '" g:5'~1Cl !;:~ ;o1Cl1i~-@l'Q' !!l"''''-<;> bT Q Qi Qj o' "lli::-g.'6 '" ~ iiI 1';'.... i? ijfllli ~ Xi g: iiI''!::l ~"",Ra i5::J"' a:s, ct~Qtllr~ ~~ll~ct Ii l!.! ~, iil l1i ~ 'Jl 5' ~ ~IJ ~!~ ~ ~ 10 ~TZ tz I m U1 . -c 3: ..1 Service Commitment Letter # 2087-0 Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Tuesday, September 11, 2007 P.O. Box 3000 - 31315 Chaney 51. - Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 (951) 674-3146 - FAX (951) 674-7554 --------~------~-------~-----~- ---- -------~-----------~ -------------~ ------ Location: 30348 Baum Avenue, Lake Elsinore, CA Residential 375-324-027 (310) 508-0740 Fax: (310) 212-7823 # of Lots: Acreage: Tract Map: <1 Zoning: APN: Phone: Sime Klarin 1551 W. 211th Street Torrance, CA 90501 Attn: Owner Paid Date: $75.00 8/22/2007 Credit Card/182914 Will Serve Fees Paid: Check I Receipt #: Water Fees Effective Date 7/1/2007 to 12/31/2007 Project WILL NOT BE SERVED for the following reason(s): Parcel will be served by Elsinore Water District. Sewer Fees Effective Date 7/1/2007 to 12/31/2007 Project is eligible for service based on the following conditions: Before sewer service is available to this parcel, a sewer line extension between approximately 350 - 825 feet and a sewer lateral must be constructed. Construct facilities per District approved plans. See attached Procedures to Construct Sewer Laterals for District requirements. Additional inspection fees may apply. Fee Description Unit Capacity ______~r EDL-___ Qty Ratio EDU Base Fees Credit/Adust Net Fees Total Amt Regional Sewer Connection Fees By Sewer Area Per EDU 1 $6,690.00 - $6,690.00 $6,690.00 Fees per Unit: $6,690.00 Total Sewer Fees $6,690.00 $6,690.00 Total Water and Sewer Fees ~~\'\'.~.~_~c:I~~.rc:ll__l:~_<:c:ltig!1!IIII~~~f19_~~g~~~_lJr~_ ... To schedule an inspection appointment for a sewer lateral connection, call EVMWD's Engineering Department at extension 8265, at least 48 hours in advance. To schedule a pre-construction meeting for sewer lateral construction, call EVMWD's Engineering Department at extension 8265, at least 48 hours in advance. See Procedures To Construct Sewer Lateral for additional information. Note, you must contact Underground Service Alert (USA Dig Alert) at 1-800-227-2600 for all utility marking at least three working days prior to digging. Current water and/or sewer connection fees are subject to change without notice by the Board of Directors and fees will be based on the current fee in effect at the time of payment of fees. AGENDA ITEi.1 NO. ~ PAGE-2l- OF ...3.-"'] Service Commitment Letter # 2087-0 Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Tuesday, September 11, 2007 P.O. Box 3000 - 31315 Chaney St. - Lake Elsinore. CA 92530 (951) 674-3146 - FAX (951) 674-7554 -,._,---~----- Water/Sewer Fee Payments Paid Date: Check #: Receipt #: Paid: Authorized by Date: 9/11/2007 AGENDA ITEM NO, PAGEd ~ OF 5 '?. --, CITY OF ~ LAKE ,5,LSiNORJ: ~ DREAM EXtREME A CKNOWLEDEGEMENT OF DRAFT CONDITIONS RE: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF A SINGLE-F AMIL Y DWELLING UNIT LOCATED AT 30348 BAUM AVENUE (APN: 375-324-027) I hereby state that I/We acknowledge the draft Conditions of Approval for the above named project. I/We understand that these are draft conditions only and do hereby agree to accept and abide by all final conditions prescribed by the City of Lake Elsinore staff, as set forth in the attachments to the approval letter that will be sent after final project approval. All final conditions shall be met prior to issuance of permits or prior to the first Certificate of Occupancy, or otherwise indicated in the Conditions, subject to the approval of the Community Development Director of the City of Lake Elsinore. Date: ({-;? V-()~7 Applicant's Signature: /' /4lm~A '-' .;,. Print Name: Address: 0/IyE ~~7fR/~ /:):0 IV QII~ S;/- -?DR,J1~ Cll9DRJ/ 3/0-SO:f-D'7YD Phone Number: 951.674.3124 130 S. MAl N STRE ET LAKE ELSINORE. CA 92530 WWW.LAKE-ELSINORE.ORG AGEND.I\ m:iJl NO. S- PACE d 9 OF ~-, ",.,...., ii~~i JJ;g; )~~ )if~~ )~ir~ JJI iff~i Ii! ~ il~ ;fi ! Z;~~a ~ Q --f . _ i:i . 0 !!l i:i - a 3:;:a mo'U.... em %01;% ~~ iml: "ii >: ..(~' z IS ~~ g~"~ g_'" ~o~!ii '"~ O~J:i o ~~l'lz ~ ~pi~ g ~~~~ ~ ~~ ~ .IIUIII iWm~1 ~ II1IIII II. ~ IIi;; r-- ~I ~ ; I' (/\ I ; A AlFORD DESIGN & DRAFTING o ~ll1;':"''' o ...-- 11~';llgl..lqllll!11 l ~! i!Ii u IJ1d ,. 1Ii!!iii 1i! -I. fI!1I r lid ~ t! III HlI2!!fi II- ~; Ii (if!I i Ifi AIL Ii ~ IfDi! "I l' i'J r: Di Iii I!fii 5 i lPleHl!; n--i Hi IJ ~;& ~I Itgla. Bite elm ill BeJ, nill ~I i; J I f'j 1I!m~. lium j; i:=! I ~ I. Ii 1;15!:5!1 iI! t:iI! G "t ~ 1 ill i I Ip: =R1 I ~ ~. PI U PR :' iai~III.' i~11 ni11~111 ;, II ~ II.' .n i nl~ ~ h I. @ IJi1;'1~ . & .111"1 tll II. dlll~ijlllm,'~il'.:1. I~I. II i II I!I! I I m !!! 15 ~ d B if 'I' II I ~ 1'( 1 !II! ~ ;1 ill !~ IRI a! ii, .. r t I I I I In I I I ~II ~ ,I i . -0 70 o ~ m ("\ -l (/\ c 3: 3: > ~ ~ ....:> w -dJlIlo ....0-;= ?,~,o ~tl.!A~ cr~~~~ 0.10 ~3 .. '4("\::.-10 ~p(/\ZS :+El :s' .... ~ '" :::z l;;m g=E '" !"II ~o ~~ ~m i?i ~ KLARIN RESIDENCE aum Ave lake Elsinore, CA. ~ ~ U~ ! ~ ~ & p t-... ~ AGENDA ITEM NO:_ :---..,..:;.. PAGE_~ _O('.~-- ~I" , j;;1 I IV I I' , I I' I' ;'--- ; ~o o " '1J I s;: : Z . I . I L___ I ( '. '. i J ~(J) Ij-l m ""0 s;: Z ,......., ------ ~ -----------. 8AUM~VE:-~-~ -- I! Ii I' /'------------------ I !) ~ ---- , , ~ - -------____~I /, ~ - -------- , . / I - f---l 14 / , , / ' / , J I / ' , , / / / ' , , I , 1& J;;. I I! Ii ~I" j;;1 II "'"""""-...-- ~..."""""- ~ ..."""""-..."""""- I! ... Ii 1r =' =p '~ t, \ i I' i , l ~~ .0 I~I r I .1 C lei-I I iEl11 il q '-I > II. g II ~ :s; I;. ~ ;~ I' ~ cc 0 Illl Z A ALFORD DESIGN & DRAFTING D 4!!!!.. Ii. _a- D ...-- KLARIN RESIDENCE 30348 Ave Lake ElsillOOl, CA. ~ ~ g ;:; ~,. .. ~" i ~ ~ 5 ~L lTEi';i NO. PACE~OF ,......, ~ 1& j:;. I ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- i '-', '-.. ---- ---- ---- r): " Zil" o j:;R ~ il )> "'0 m "'0 S; Z il" j:;1 il ..~ !ill ~8 ~ Hi ~~ . ill :> ~ 0 II . . ~!i ;II ~ f'-':' lizz ':';, 1,.1 ~aa ~I~~ Il~ 1:111 il l:l!!z 811118 A~ B~~ ~:n~ .8~ ~; F .. pi ii:::f ~~ ~Uj ~f~ "J n ~; II i~i ~a IH ~~ ~I 1 !il )> .. . Il~! -" '" m .. 0 ~ '" N m ~ A ALFORD DESIGN & DRAFTING o 4~a: 'J.1L o ...-- KLARIN RESIDENCE 30348 Baum Ave lake ElsillOl8. CA ~ U~ ~ ~i ~ AGENDA lH.;'c:1 t~0, PACE '3 d-- r- OF ~I I' , II I I I . I II ... _ '"1;0 .. ...... · :1I1~ ;;I!lIP i' I. a III! II I ; ta III , J tt . II III ..'111 . .. ~ )> . I i!! I\) z . C) s z ..... m ~ """" ~ "TI :Ii en ..... "TI r- o 51 "'0 ~ " ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - - - - - en m () o z C "TI ~ ~ - J l - KLARIN RESIDENCE 30348 Baum Ave Lake ElsinOl8, CA. ~ ~ i US ~ ~ ~ ~ A ALFORD DESIGN & DRAFTING o 4!!!!.:" di. ;..JL o ...-- AGENDA rrti,:; i~O. c;- PAGE 3c3 OF '3 "7 I I ,I .: I · · I II I I I J ~ ~ c \l A AlFORD DESIGN & DRAFTlNG o 4.!!!!..~-:''' o ...-- KLARIN RESIDENCE 30348 Baum Ave Lake ElsinOlll, CA. i !: j ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .. r ~ " ~ '" ,"". ",-,,; ..v. 5 y\.....'~;~~E 3 \:f OF ""3 7 !il }> .. Illo! ~ x .. .. 0 ~ x ...... ~ '" ~ - I I ~ A ALFORD DESIGN & DRAFTING KLARIN o 41_~" RESIDENCE I t ~~ o :-=..: 303411 Baum Ave hZ Lake E1sinonl, CA. ~ AGENDA IT .. ill. . 5 PACE '3 ~S" . OF ,"7 -2.~F3~~!(.~ ~~ s:i~ i ~ to: l:\ ~ ;;: ~ t ~!:!:15~;l ~ I!Il t:: ~ ~ J:l ~ iD ; ; ;;~ -; t: ;;;:: ~ !"!- ~..... ~ ...!" ,.. . B-... M -~IE~~~.i~~'-!.m~~~~~~~~~~'~.~~.~~i~I~~I~il~. 0.. '~~.~.'i'~!..~li~.'.~I~.~~I"!~'~'.'1-5'~"~~'I~~~'-~..~g~8~~~~~'~~~~ '11 !iii ! ! I i I! Ii I I! 111111 i ill!l III I! II ill! 11111 Ilill! I il! II I! iii WIll i! 1IIIlI i! II i i III1III i I il Il'l i 11111 i! III! i I i II i II Iml!! I !I,I :!Il1m IIIIII'!IIII hll!lll!!!III! llliiilllmrmrmm ! 1'llllillllt,ljlillii!11 n 1111111 !Illl !l! 11!111!111~ -----------=---1 ~~~ ~ :i~e~ ! l!g\!~~~ ~ ~I ~~~.~r~~~.~: ~~~~ ~g~a~~ \! . ~=I~~Hm~~ ~~~~.p~~ ~ f ~ e !; >~;1 a E~'.~ -~- ~Q",i I~I~ .~ Ill! i 1;lli j 'Iiili ! illi!llilll!lli Ii 1llllii:1 II i!in!llll:mllillll i !I II! llllll III illllll!! ~ , " M I ; ~ ~ ~h Ii ...\!Q ~~. i!~~~"~<.~~\!1 ~~ . g~li · ~ . ~.'" .~i::~~~n~o~ ~.rn ~ . iii ~ .c ~. ~ ' . Ii. ~ ~i> ~.~~E ~ ~~ ro !U; ~ ii' h ~ ~ 1;1 ; In U i n !~~fUi~i~i! Ii i ~d ~i ~ ; nn hi~~n~~ii in Iii =1" in n II ~ ~ ~idn Ii ., KS 1: ~ E ~~ ~ i !~. i -li!l ~I ~ . ~~~~ ~lidm~~s: ~ ~ ~ ~~;: ~~il ~~. ~ . .~~ i ~ ii ~~ ~ ii. ~ ~ '- m i ~~ u --r(rTT"Tj ~i ~ ~i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~J~ii~~ ~. ~ ~J. ~.~ ~~; . ~ i~ ~ m ~ l ~~ ~ ~~ ~ I I jll I ,~I Q ~ ~ ~ ~..o ~ ~ -. 0 Q rn · - ~.'I, i 1II,.I~j ~ _ : 1.1 ~I fir! , ~ ! ~--' ~... --. ~'.'~~{~:; -r, .~ I i I I I! ~ ~~~';; x~~._ ',; ~~1 ~I I II i ! I ~:~.irrl'1r--~\ ;., . ~ >~n___ ~.I ; I j 1+1 ii' i I i i..lJ l, II~'~~ I \\ .6 '~ ~.-c~-=- ~- ~~~-~;- _ ~..__ ~':;?i! 'I..-i J~~..~ I"" ~ I ' -- ~, III .. ! Ilj\ ! il 11-' .. _n) N .<jl~C/I,/~;;' ~-~.___ ~ l~-Ltl LU]~'II II~ IliJ ,/ . '\ '~/'.~' .?=-.:-".:-.=-. =~_~. > ':," :,o'~-c,._. -.. _'" ~'-. Ii;! Iii i:, '.\111 Ii ~:':.J~ Ii. - c I. ---__ -- ,I I" ", I~l' i! 1- -. ! / . Of'!),)' ._~ ::~J.L~uJ i bF~-~j1 i__J~ "--1;..:1.---. -"'J'","",,~ 7--'''"_'>_;-;-:,.:'C.~~,,, . '~i' i \~ ; c J.1'I~t?:.:,~-t </ / /~ ~ 'jt1.. -:r- ~.;~...:..~__-l, ! \r~ ;. '1) ~ 11 t +..' ;!'t~: I':: .//; ,/ ---__. .:.[ .I) . . 1 i\ :0 ,',~ Zb W. I ~::~ .1; ..1._.;/.. "./. --- :::-1-.. I ~, ~L'" ~i{--" i: 1 ~ ~ I ~1 i ~~. 1 .~'t~;._- -:ll/~/ /.' 1/ ' "+ \ . ~-l I'Y 19 I ,. /, '. d+~ h: 1 .. _ "~?~/ "z ... ';~;;/I>''<ic f, ~ "..III ~ /. .h,..,. / .. I I. ~ \i /1 -,:>~ >, , :",0 Jlo:"" .{bllf~/-V' " ':":'~-;,N'~ E. (;f;y:~~r '" ~j~ fir... ./I~'.l, l;aJI ./- ~f~ ~# / 1/- 111/ ''''~'', 0 <r /,(/1,0, /! ??JV"fj 'W it ~c //fl/ ,,,.' . ',I......... '" -..J- P, ,~' I." ~ /~I / '-, ~ '-~....... ,~...{ '~,.yy l ['"';, :: '/;,/ ............"', *,"'''' 1,-'/ 1".,.--.1 ,:J ~-t' /,1, ........'lr06ift: /"".i"'-"- ~~ / I; -, j 4~f ".,/"~ III., ~ ,I 'B",,.<! -i l ~ d i/IJ " . I' ~., <:.>-- -,'-.; - ""t "?~~!~~ f~Q/ o. " ~! I '-------"--tY~ ;,; j',- 'il,J" . . ".. <<"'. '~ " -....... I f I Z\)~~~~~.~'>L. '.-~~......":>;;>-r/~ --il1f/ >. -..(0" / r' Y"-. . -- '....]f/;' < ~ / .'/,i!l..../ .Ij.r." '~. ' , ~' \ ~. . ~~r~> "~0...:tfjlrr---",c...-::::~. '?"'" OJ" / ". "- /....3~lOI7, "':.r/, .">.:-_~~_ ......",_.,--:_~ '/, ..'" r/..=- / :ri~~' / 0;;. -. ___'""t--- ._-_~ ..90 / . ." / / //C6"/~,~~---,:~;?/" 'q. / ,/ , ;;"'"'/ I / };,.J ..'~/ ~: '------.;:;:-:-;,.. I ;:1 ! n~L_~_. _ ._1 i I ! ! rl:-1111:~. I i!l~ I !ilt~' :1 . ~I~! III 'I~~ ~ ~III i~ ~~ ",I ,~ '1 o ' -;.:r:-:-;~ ~ c ! \ ~ I' ms~:I~ tT'r=:=r"4rl i:ill!iilll! UI~;: ~~ I~~;~m "' Ii i ~ I / i ~2~t I !\HT---=---=cl/ lm~i i.~ I ~~~~ : ~ . --".-"~!'I'~I "! III ~~ ~ ~ ~ i i Ii :;, OJ ,,,",,,0 ~ : I g g ~~~ m I -! I ~~~g!ml ~I b,~t~l~ i ~ ,,'I z ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ I' ~ '-' :r-...., m 7.1 I I -'~lr"=-:-~l 3 ~ -<j '100 ~. i T;f~~)(~r1 I' i I i ~ I~ ~I"" ~~~~ ~ II ~ 1m ' ; ~ ~ ~ I'" I i I~ ! ~" ~ ill' I Ii' I_~' \ I ~. HI \ f H~ ~ ! I Ii! U i; I I I 1~.l.~8.~~11 ' 17"'" ~ ~ ~ I ll_.__.._~_._.lJ ~ F ~ ~ ~ ' I I~ l~ I'" 1~ 'lsl~'18 ~. ~ ~ t") ~0 ~ ~ ~ ~~~ =tJtt:..... \J r- ~~?5.; 8 ~~~8 ~ ;~~: ~ Ii!! J "i.j>.-' ~~~ ~Vl 1l~ y;~ "'d ~G; tTJn mCi.l ~t'Ij 2:0 ~~ ~z ;j0 O"'d ~t""" >~ , ~~~~ ~ u ,'''i'~'~''~;c,:r 10 ~ ~""''''1'''':i5!cir" - !il!!lilli t:""1;~'~\l~;;Off{ m ~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~f ~~~~~ z ~: ~~_:,;i~!~ :i' , , " ~~~ 'tJ ~'t ~ ~~~ l>l :l> il~ ~ 8 ,;.C'~. ~ en e"~~ .... n~ ! -~ ~ ~ I" /~l /,," ;, r"" M l;,;t --~ /; / ~fl';~ ///l/l IX \/ ~'4t.,,~1 v~& J i: AI.<)<:< \ '1Z~ "i'{Y,l jA~ / ~\ '" /_. ?,V /(/ 'C', >''''' 'j~t "\ / "~> j'.:--...-/.'t, 5 v /tr \-> ~ j \:~EEN~'I~" ~? _ ~ '/9~' <tp OF ~-; / II '""' . . II \J o(J) ~~ O() ~G> ~ \J 9l- ~su 9l:::T ~o 0 ([) !::3o <11.., ~su <1IC .., Ql:J ~3 0.., 0.., cO' Q) CD 0 3 < () 0 :J OJ su CD su CD C - -. - - (J) J: ([) CD - ([) i3 " CD 3 0 .., :J fI) C e 0 a. CD ~ .-+ I\) 0 <0 '< .-+ 0 - 0 0 CD ...... :::T to ([) ([) ~ .... 5 to AGEND!\ 'Tr'i';f~~Q "'0 .,~ ;''\ ti a.;;. ~. ~ . s:: PACE ~-:l '?>7 OF -l iii ~~ g,.., ~c glP: ., :f~ ..~ II c Jl3" 6'~ a.. 6g ;.-< .,.. ...., - .., ~~. ?"j ~; !l." ..a. cO< iil-~ lil~ ~a ....Q c&" iitiii lil_! Kai ~~~ .. "Tl0 6iQo ;la5 6 a:;> :flilm ..-~ "5l3m .sl91a ag... . mi. . ~ ,,- ..g. ~=" 3,g ~i: ..,~ l!... ~~ :~ "c 3i !,3 .... ~!j: .., . iDi'i !l.c :fl!. ...., a~" 0- ;;a ~Il :f.. "3 l1~ c< l!.~ z CD ~ (J) o :::T CD 3 CD 'i:i tT1 ::e 'Tl tT1 n ~ 'i:i :> r tT1 ~ ~ t"J CD c.n ..a. I .,.. ~)> ~O' ta .....0 CD )> !!. OfC O:J il go ~~ ~~ SUfC ~ C) ~ " - D) ::::s. ::::s 6~ =~ o TO: FROM: DATE: PREPARED BY: PROJECT: APPLlCANT/: OWNER PROJECT REQUEST CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OCTOBER 16, 2007 KIRT A. COURY, PROJECT PLANNER TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2007-05 - AMENDING AND RESTATING SECTION 17.35.020 OF THE LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING RESIDENTIAL USES IN OPEN SPACE DISTRICTS CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, 130 S. MAIN STREET, LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530 Staff requests that the Planning Commission consider amending and restating section 17.35.020 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code regarding residential uses in Open Space Districts and that the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve an ordinance amending and restating section 17.35.020 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. In addition, it is requested that the Planning Commission consider and make a recommendation that the City Council approve the Negative Declaration prepared for the amendment of section 17.35.020. PROJECT BACKGROUND Chapter 17.35 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code sets forth zoning standards for the Open Space District. Pursuant to Section 17.35.010, land is designated as Open Space if (1) the land is not suitable for residential or other intensive use for the reason that such uses may endanger the health, safety, and welfare of persons due to flooding, fire or erosion, and/or (2) the land is suitable to allow citizens to pursue recreational activities. Section 17.35.020(A)(4) permits the development of one single family dwelling unit per ten acres of land on property zoned as Open Space if the single family dwelling unit is used in conjunction with agricultural uses. Section 17.35.020(A)(4) directly contradicts the underlying purpose of the Open Space District which says that residential land uses are not suitable in areas zoned Open Space. Very low density residential land uses (i.e., one dwelling unit per ten acres) are permitted in those areas throughout the City . -1"1" i-":"" ,v.., ~ AGEN~:G~ t;"i.'j,~ oF'1y'- PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2007-05 - AMENDMENT AND RESTATEMENT OF CHAPTER 17.35.020 OF THE LEMC OCTOBER 16, 2007 which have a Rural Mountainous General Plan Land Use designation and which are zoned as Rural-Mountainous-Residential. ISCUSSION he City wishes to delete Section 17.35.020(A)(4) from the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code because it is inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the Open Space District and because the Rural-Mountainous-Residential zone provides opportunity for land owners to develop their property at one dwelling unit per ten acres. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION In accordance with Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 15070, a Negative Declaration was prepared for the amendment and restatement of Chapter 17.35.020 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. Staff determined that a Negative Declaration was appropriate because the Initial Study suggested that the project would not have a significant effect on the environment. The Negative Declaration is complete and acceptable and contains all of the information required by the California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Pub. Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.: "CEQA") and the CEQA Guidelines. The Negative Declaration was properly circulated for public review and comment in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15073 and 15105. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2007-_ recommending the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore adopt an ordinance amend and restate Chapter 17.35.020 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (regarding residential uses in Open Space Districts) and adoption of a Negative Declaration therefor. These recommendations are based on the Resolution, findings, exhibits attached to this Staff Report. PREPARED BY: APPROVED BY: KIRT A. COURY, PROJECT PLANNERKe- ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, 1f'I/\~~ DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1 y V v ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution No. 2007-_ recommending the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore approve an ordinance amending and restating Chapter 17.35.020 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (regarding residential uses in Open Space Districts) and adoption of a Negative Declaration therefor. 2. Initial Study/Negative Declaration AGEN~~~E~O.k RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND RESTATING SECTION 17.35.020 OF THE LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING RESIDENTIAL USES IN OPEN SPACE DISTRICTS AND ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION THEREFOR WHEREAS, Chapter 17.35 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code sets forth zoning standards for the Open Space District; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 17.35.010, land is designated as Open Space if (1) the land is not suitable for residential or other intensive use for the reason that such uses may endanger the health, safety, and welfare of persons due to flooding, fire or erosion, and/or (2) the land is suitable to allow citizens to pursue recreational activities; and WHEREAS, Section 17.35.020(A)(4) permits the development of one single family dwelling unit per ten acres of land on property zoned as Open Space if the single family dwelling unit is used in conjunction with agricultural uses; and WHEREAS, Section 17.35.020(A)(4) directly contradicts the underlying purpose of the Open Space District which says that residential land uses are not suitable in areas zoned Open Space; and WHEREAS, very low density residential land uses (i.e., one dwelling unit per ten acres) are permitted in those areas throughout the City which have a Rural Mountainous General Plan Land Use designation and which are zoned as Rural- Mountainous-Residential; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to delete Section 17.35.020(A)(4) from the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code because it is inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the Open Space District and because the Rural-Mountainous-Residential zone provides opportunity for land owners to develop their property at one dwelling unit per ten acres; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 15063 of the State Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Sections 15000 et seq.: "CEQA Guidelines"), the City, as lead agency, prepared an Initial Study to determine if the proposed text amendment may have a significant effect on the environment; and WHEREAS, the results of the Initial Study revealed that the proposed text amendment would not have a significant effect on the environment and the City therefore prepared a Negative Declaration in accordance with the requirements of Section 15070 of the CEQA Guidelines; and AGENDA PACE "3 I'JO. b OF q~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE 2 OF 4 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council regarding zoning ordinances; and WHEREAS, public notice of this amendment and restatement to the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code has been given, and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on October 16, 2007. NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission considered the proposed Negative Declaration and finds and determines that based upon the results of the Initial Study and all of the evidence in the record that the proposed text amendment will not have a significant effect on the environment. Moreover, the Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that the Negative Declaration is complete and acceptable and contains all of the information required by the California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Pub. Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.: "CEQA") and the CEQA Guidelines. The Negative Declaration was properly circulated for public review and comment in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15073 and 15105. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt the Negative Declaration. SECTION 2. In accordance with Government Code Section 65855, the Planning Commission sets forth the following reasons for its recommendation that the City Council approve the proposed amendment and restatement of Section 17.35.020 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code: 1. The proposed text amendment will not be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort, or the general welfare of the persons working or residing within the City. The purpose of the text amendment is to delete Section 17.35.020(A)(4) from the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code because it is inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the Open Space District. This revision will ensure the protection of the health, safety, comfort and general welfare of persons working and/or residing in Lake Elsinore by prohibiting residential uses in areas where human habitation is dangerous. 2. The proposed text amendment will not be injurious to property or improvements within the City as the proposed revisions and modifications are an overall beneficial enhancement to the Open Space Districts throughout the City. ACENDt\ nE~ii rm.~ b PACE tt OF "-111 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE 3 OF 4 3. The proposed text amendment is consistent with the General Plan, Community Design Element, and serves as an important link between the City's built and natural environments. SECTION 3. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council that Section 17.35.020(A) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code shall be amended and restated as follows: A. No building or land shall be used, and no building or structure shall be designed, erected, structurally altered or enlarged except for the following purposes: 1. Drainage channels, watercourse, spreading grounds, settling basins, freeways, parkways, park drives; 2. Privately owned or public recreational areas, parks, playgrounds, wildlife preserves, and such buildings and structures as are related thereto, but permitting no commercial uses; 3. Agricultural uses provided an agreement between the City and the land owner can be made which will allow him to operate under the California Land Conservation Act; 4. Single f3mily d'Nellings when used in conjunction v:ith 3gricultur31 uses 3110wing not more than one (1) d'Nelling unit for every ten (10) acres of bnd; GA. Similar uses to those listed in this section, which in the opinion of Planning Commission, would not be detrimental or incompatible with the intent and purpose, as set forth in this Chapter. SECTION 4. Based upon all of the evidence presented and the above findings, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore approve an ordinance amending and restating Section 17.35.020(A) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code and that the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore approve the Negative Declaration prepared therefor. SECTION 5. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. AGENDA m:r.fJ NO. PACE S ro OF Y II PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE 4 OF 4 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of October 2007, by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: Rolfe M. Preisendanz Director of Community Development Michael O'Neal, Chairman Lake Elsinore Planning Commission AGEr'JDP~ ~TEr;,) r~o. ~ OF L1 \1 PACE Co INITIAL STUDY / NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2007-03 RUNNING DEER ANNEXATION PREPARED By: CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 130 SOUTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA 92530 AUGUST 2007 AGEWA ITEM NO. 6 PACE -, OF '1 L{ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Table of Contents I. INTRODUCnON 1 II. PROJECf DESCRIPTION 6 III. INITIAL STUDY / ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 11 IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 18 1. LAND USE PLANNING 18 2. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION 19 3. GEOLOGY 21 4. HYDROLOGY/WATER QUALITY 23 5. AIR QUALITY 24 6. NOISE 25 7. BIOLOGY 25 8. AESTHETICS 26 9. LIGHT AND GLARE 27 10.POPULATION AND HOUSING 27 11. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES 28 12. CULTURAL RESOURCES 29 13. PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES 29 14. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 34 15. PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED 36 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1 REGIONAL AND VICINITY MAPs FIGURE 2 AERIAL PHOTO / PROJECf SITE 6 7 LIST OFTABLES TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND ZONING CHANGES 8 ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT A- NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT; NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY ATTACHMENT B - CEQA DISTRIBUTION LIST FOR PUBLIC REVIEW "(":"-.''"'1' rT-:~.." ~,'O ~ 1-\;...)t:t;G,r,./..".~ Ii ~ t-\>J'1 E'... . PAGE e OF \..{ Y Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Introduction I. Introduction A. Purpose This document is an Initial Study and Negative Declaration for evaluation of environmental impacts resulting from the annexation of approximately 589 acres, located within the City of Lake Elsinore Sphere of Influence. This annexation is a Condition of Approval required by the Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) in order to fully approve the Annexation 2005-81-1, Pacific Clay Annexation No. 72. In addition to analyzing the impacts of the annexation, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration also evaluate impacts resulting from minor revisions (i.e., amendments) to two (2) sections of the City of Lake Elsinore Zoning Code. For purposes of this document, this annexation and related text amendments as described in Section II Project Description will be called the "proposed project." B. California Environmental Quality Act Requirements As defined by Section 15063 of the State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, an Initial Study (IS) is prepared primarily to provide the Lead Agency with information to use as the basis for determining whether an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Supplemental EIR, Negative Declaration (ND), or Addendum would be appropriate for providing the necessary environmental documentation and clearance for any proposed project. This Initial Study has determined that the proposed annexation of the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a NEGATIVE DECLARATION (ND) has been prepared. This Initial Study and Negative Declaration have been prepared in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et. seq.); Section 15070 of the State Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15000, et. seq.); applicable requirements of the City of Lake Elsinore; and the regulations, requirements, and procedures of any other responsible public agency or an agency with jurisdiction by law. The City of Lake Elsinore is designated the Lead Agency, in accordance with Section 15050 of the CEQA Guidelines. The Lead Agency is the public agency, which has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project, which may have significant effects upon the environment. 1 AGENDt\ ITEM rm. PACE q ~ OF l{ '1 Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Introduction C. Intended Uses of Initial Study and Negative Declaration This Initial Study and Negative Declaration are informational documents intended to inform City of Lake Elsinore decision-makers, other responsible or interested agencies, and the general public of potential environmental effects of the proposed project. The environmental review process has been established to enable public agencies to evaluate environmental consequences and to examine and implement methods of eliminating or reducing any potentially adverse impacts. While CEQA requires that consideration be given to avoiding environmental damage, the Lead Agency and other responsible public agencies must balance or override adverse environmental effects based upon other public objectives, including economic and social goals. As the Lead Agency, the City of Lake Elsinore has determined that environmental clearance for the proposed project can be provided with a Negative Declaration. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15205, the Initial Study and Draft Negative Declaration will be circulated for a period of 20 days for public and agency review. Comments received on the document will be considered by the Lead Agency before it acts on the proposed project. D. Contents of Initial Study This Initial Study is organized to facilitate a basic understanding of the existing setting and environmental implications of the as follows: I. INTRODUCTION presents an introduction to the entire report. This section identifies City of Lake Elsinore contact persons involved in the process, scope of environmental review, environmental procedures, and incorporation by reference documents. II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION describes the proposed project. A description of discretionary approvals and permits required for proposed project implementation is also included. III. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM contains the City's Environmental Checklist Form. The checklist form presents results of the environmental evaluation for the proposed project and those issue areas that would have either a significant impact, potentially significant impact, or no impact. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS evaluates each response provided in the environmental checklist form. Each response checked in the checklist form is discussed and supported with sufficient data and analysis. As appropriate, each response discussion describes and 2 ~Nl"'\n IT"f[ f}O ~ AGt:\ uk I;;:"S'" .- PACE [0 OF - Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Introduction identifies specific impacts anticipated with proposed project implementation. In this section, mitigation measures are also recommended, as appropriate, to reduce adverse impacts to levels of "less than significant" where possible. Also included are the MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE in accordance with Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines. Further, PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED identifies those persons consulted and involved in preparation of this Initial Study. E. Scope of Environmental Analysis For evaluation of environmental impacts, each question from the Environmental Checklist Form is stated and responses are provided according to the analysis undertaken as part of the Initial Study. All responses will take into account the whole action involved, including offsite as well as onsite, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. Project impacts and effects will be evaluated and quantified, when appropriate. To each question, there are four possible responses, including: 1. No Impact: A "No Impact" response is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to the proposed project. 2. Less Than Significant Impact: Development associated with project implementation will have the potential to impact the environment. These impacts, however, will be less than the levels of thresholds that are considered significant and no additional analysis is required. 3. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: This applies where incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact" The Lead Agency must describe the mitigation measures and explain how the measures reduce the effect to a less than significant level. 4. Potentially Significant Impact: Future implementation will have impacts that are considered significant and additional analysis and possibly an EIR are required to identify mitigation measures that could reduce these impacts to less than significant levels. F. Incorporation by Reference and Technical Studies Information, findings, and conclusions contained in this document are based on incorporation by reference of the City of Lake Elsinore General 3 AGENDA ITEM NO. 0 PACE-1L-OF 'l,f LI Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Introduction Plan and technical studies specific to the proposed project, which are discussed in the following section. Incorporation by Reference Incorporation by reference is a procedure for reducing the size of EIRs and/or Negative Declarations (ND) and is most appropriate for including long, descriptive, or technical materials that provide general background information, but do not contribute directly to the specific analysis of the proposed project itself. This procedure is particularly useful when an EIR or ND relies on a broadly-drafted EIR for its evaluation of cumulative impacts of related projects (Las Virgenes Homeowners Federation v. County of Los Angeles [1986, 177 Ca. 3d 300]). If an EIR or ND relies on information from a supporting study that is available to the public, the EIR or ND cannot be deemed unsupported by evidence or analysis (San Francisco Ecology Center v. City and County of San Francisco [1975, 48 Ca.3d 584, 595]). This document incorporates by reference the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan (1995), the Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR (1991), and the Riverside County General Plan (2003). When an EIR or Negative Declaration incorporates a document by reference, the incorporation must comply with Section 15150 of the CEQA Guidelines as follows: · The incorporated documents must be available to the public or be a matter of public record (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150[a]). All incorporated documents are available, along with this document, at the City of Lake Elsinore, Community Development Department, 130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530, ph. (951) 674-3124, during normal business hours. . The incorporated documents must be available for inspection by the public at an office of the lead agency (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150[b]). Documents are available at the City of Lake Elsinore, Community Development Department, 130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530, ph. (951) 674-3124, during normal business hours. · This document must summarize the portion of the document(s) being incorporated by reference or briefly describe information that cannot be summarized. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150[c]). The Negative Declaration brings forth information from the City and County General Plans relates to existing and proposed land use and zoning designations, as applicable. · This document must include the State identification number of the incorporated document (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150[d]). The State Clearinghouse Number for the General Plan EIR is 91122065. 4 AGW~~E 1 r;.- ;. 'j L/ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Introduction · The material to be incorporated in this document will include general background information (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150[fJ). 5 NO. ~ PACE (3 OF Y l{ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Project Description II. Project Description A. Project Location and Setting The proposed annexation comprises of 589.28-acres located within the City of Lake Elsinore Sphere of Influence along the western border of the City of Lake Elsinore (Figure 1). The site is bordered by the conditionally approved Pacific Clay Annexation (LAFCO #2005-81-1) to the north, the Cleveland National Forest to the west, and the City of Lake Elsinore to the south and east, and is comprised of 37 parcels (Figure 2). These parcels are as follows: 389-290-001 389-290-014 389-290-023 389-290-029 391-790-007 391-790-012 391-800-004 391-800-009 389-290-002 389-290-017 389-290-025 391-250-003 391-790-008 391-790-013 391-800-005 391-800-010 389-290-009 389-290-019 389-290-026 391-790-001 391-790-009 391-800-001 391-800-006 389-290-010 389-290-020 389-290-027 391-790-005 391-790-010 391-800-002 391-800-007 389-290-013 389-290-022 389-290-028 391-790-006 391-790-011 391-800-003 391-800-008 The topography of the site is gentle sloping hills and plateaus on the eastern portion to rugged mountainous terrain on the western portion, with a valley between the two. There are several rural residential dwellings onsite (5-7) in combination with agricultural related buildings. 6 "'-0""" I~T"'" r!O b P:vt"~~~~~ ~"14' r OF Y LJ = Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Project Description The site consists of mostly undisturbed land, although there are some portions of the site used as an illegal dump site for household and agricultural waste and construction debris. B. Project Purpose As mentioned above, Riverside LAFCO conditionally approved the Pacific Clay Annexation (City of Lake Elsinore Annexation No. 72, LAFCO Annexation 2005-81-1) on March 23, 2006 by Resolution 21-06. Specifically, the following is the condition of approval that calls for the annexation of the project site: "Prior to recordation of the Certificate of Completion, a complete application must be submitted for annexation to the City of the pocket area south of the subject proposaL."I The annexation will alleviate the "island effect" of Riverside County land that will be created once the Pacific Clay annexation is approved. Public services and utilities will be provided to this newly annexed area by the City of Lake Elsinore. 1 Part 6, section (d) of Resolution 21-06 passed March 23, 2006 by Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission. 7 ~_''''''>' ;.,.<,'.~ (in ~ ACL:,,"~~~~C"i5 OF \;f Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Project Description c. Project Description The proposed project annexation involves a change from existing County land uses and zoning to comparable City of Lake Elsinore land uses and zoning. Table 1 below provides the descriptions and acreages for each County and City land use and zone. The allowable densities under the City's land use designation and pre- zoning are equivalent or similar to the densities allowable under the County's existing land use and zoning. The purpose for this is to neither "de-value" the properties within the annexation area by lowering the allowable density, nor to bring forth a substantial increase in density as part of this annexation. However, as shown in Table 1, the change within 143 acres of the annexation area from the County's Rural Residential at one (1) dwelling unit (DU) per five (5) acres would allow 29 DU as compared to the City's Very Low Density at one (1) DU per two (2) acres which would allow 72 DU. This would result in a non-significant increase of 43 D U over the existing County conditions. This would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire 589-acre proposed annexation. Further, no development application is included as part of the annexation. Any future development applications will be subject to environmental analysis as required pursuant to CEQA. approxImately 51 sg acres Riverside County (acres) City of Lake Elsinore (acres) RM (410) Future SP (243) Existing Land Use RR (143) M (225) OS-MR (35) VLD (53) LM (67) Proposed Land Use NA Mt (410) VLD (143) after GP A is approved OS (35) R-A-lO (486) Existing Zoning R-A-2 112 (67) NA M-R (35) R-M-R (410) Proposed Pre-Zoning NA RR (143) OS (35) Table 1 Existing and Proposed Land Uses and Zoning ( . I 8 ) Note: To date, the County's current zoning designations have not been made consistent with their land uses approved in their General Plan Update. 8 Ar'C''\'~'l'' ,.""':'" -'0 I ul;;;;~~l;;~\ ~ ~ ~~~, ~~' .~ PACEJh OF yy _ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Project Description Existing County Land Use RM = Rural Mountainous; 1 DU /10 acres RR = Rural Residential; 1 DU/5 acres OS-MR = Open Space Mineral Residential; no DU; mineral extraction only Existing City Land Use Future SP = Future Specific Plan; This land use is being eliminated from the proposed General Plan Update, anticipated for approval in December 2007. M = Mountainous; 1 DU/lO acres VLD = Very Low Density; 1 DU/2 acres (i.e., 0.5 DU/1 acre) LM = Low Medium; 6 DU/acre County Zoning R-A-lO = Residential Agriculture 10; 1 DU /10 acres R-A-2 1/2 = Residential Agriculture 21/2; 1 DU/2.5 acres MR = Mineral Resources; No allowable residential development; Mineral extraction only City Proposed Land Use (after GPA approval) MT = Mountainous; 1 DU/lO acres VLD = Very Low Density; 1 DU/2 acres (Le., 0.5 DU/1 acre) OS = Open Space City Proposed Pre-Zoning R-M-R = Rural Mountainous Residential; 1 DU/lO acres RR = Rural Residential; 1 DU/2 acres OS = No residential development; Recreation District Overlay does allow for mining and quarrying As part of the proposed project, two (2) text amendments to the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code will also be necessary, and are described as follows: . Amend and restate Section 17.35.020 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) regarding residential uses in Open Space Districts. The purpose of this text amendment is to delete Section 17.35.020(A)(4) from the LEMC because it is inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the Open Space District and because the Rural-Mountainous-Residential zone already provides opportunity for landowners to develop their property at one dwelling unit per ten acres. This revision will ensure the protection of the health, safety, comfort and general welfare of persons working and/ or residing in Lake Elsinore by prohibiting residential uses in areas where human habitation is dangerous. . Delete and reserve Chapter 17.06 of the LEMC regarding the Resource Conservation Overlay District. The recently added Chapter 17.61 to the LEMC establishing the M-3 Mineral Resources and Related Manufacturing District 9 r~c;.;;~Jr NO. ~ l, OF~Y PAGE Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Project Description rendered the terms of the existing Chapter 17.06 superfluous and unnecessary. Chapter 17.61 more thoroughly outlines the application process and the regulations regarding treatment and extraction of natural resources within City limits. The purpose of this text amendment is to clarify inconsistencies in the LEMC. Other entitlements required as part of the proposed project include a General Plan Amendment (GPA) and PreZone. D. Analysis Under CEQA While the annexation of these parcels lays the foundation for future development, no development plans are included with the annexation, text amendments, GPA, or Prezone. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s8g-acre proposed annexation. Any further evaluation of impacts of the annexation would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that all applicable studies, i.e. biological, geotechnical, air quality, hydrology, and others be included as part of the environmental assessment process. Any impacts and mitigation related to environmental impacts would be identified and mitigated as required by CEQA. For all future development proposals the City would invite review and comments by the Regulatory Agencies and the public, including landowners within and around the annexation boundary. In addition, two (2) text amendments are being proposed for the purposes of clarifying and making consistent two ordinances in the LEMC. These text amendments will only be evaluated in the checklist below where applicable. E. Public Outreach The City held a public outreach meeting on June 28, 2007 for the purposes of informing those within and adjacent to the proposed project area that an annexation is being processed. No issues related to potential environmental impacts were raised at this meeting. 10 AGEN~~~~C"1 i~ o;::2[ l1 = Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Checklist Form III. Initial Study / Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: Running Deer Annexation 2. Lead Agency Name, Address, and Phone Number: City of Lake Elsinore Planning Department 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore CA 92530 (951) 674-3124 3. Contact Person and Title: Wendy Worthey, Principal Environmental Planner 4. Project Location: The proposed annexation includes the land north of the existing boundary of the City of Lake Elsinore, south of Annexation No. 72 (Pacific Clay Annexation), east of Cleveland National Forest, and west of Lake Street located in unincorporated Riverside County. 5. Project Sponsor Name(s) and Address(es): City of Lake Elsinore Planning Department 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 (951) 674-3124 6. Existing General Plan Designation: Refer to Table 1 above in Section II.C. Project Description 7. Zoning: Refer to Table 1 above in Section II.C. Project Description 8. Project Description: Refer to Section II Project Description above. 11 Ar!::~!'-)"\ n,"~ ~.ilD L, v~n;vf"\ i' (..;.d h~ ... PAce.-l:L.Or- Lf'1 D Geology D Hydrology D Air Quality D Noise D Biology D Aesthetics D Light and Glare D Energy/Mineral Resources D Cultural Resources D Public Services/Utilities 12 AGENDi'\. nE~~ ,-JO. ~ PACE dO OF VI l( Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Checklist Form 9. Surrounding Land Uses The Pacific Clay Company has active mineral (clay and gravel) extraction, rock crushing, and brick and pottery fabrication offsite to the north of the proposed annexation. To the west is the Cleveland National Forest, which consists of rugged open space. To the south is a mixture of developed residential and open space within the City of Lake Elsinore. To the east is Lake Street and residential development. 10. Other Required Approvals and Involved Agencies: Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission 11. Incorporation by Reference: As permitted in Section 15150 of the CEQA Guidelines, environmental documents can incorporate by reference all or portions of other documents that are a matter of public record. The information presented in this document is based upon other environmental documents. Information and data from the following documents are incorporated by reference: General Plan EIR; City of Lake Elsinore, 1991 This document is available for review at the Lake Elsinore City Hall; 130 South Main Street: Lake Elsinore, California 92530; Phone: (951) 674- 3124. 12. Potentially Significant Impacts: D Land Use and Planning D Transportation/Circulation Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Checklist Form 13. Determination: On the basis of this initial evaluation: o I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION shall be prepared. D I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will NOT be significant effects in this case because proposed mitigation measures reduce effects to insignificant levels. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION shall be prepared. D I find that the proposed project COULD have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT shall be prepared. September 4, 2007 Wendy Worthey, Principal Environmental Planner Name and Title Date 13 AGEf\e~Dr~ lTt:fi~ i;JO~ PACE d f Co OF yy t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .... 0 Z 8 - .... 0 aat f;I;. - '" E5~~ ~ III $ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ CJ a.l ~ ~.... .c U ...:lli5 -; - = a.l .... 8 = = ~ = 0 ~ 0 - q:: .':: "tl 'S: .... ~ ~ = ~bI)~ l'lil .....,:: ~ rIJ.... 0 b~ e ";1Il0 .':: III ~ =~~ ~~ 0 ~ >>.... :;at .':: ~ ~ =$ ~ ~ ~.... 0.... ~rIJ = .S: - "" - "" 1:i = a.l .S: Q - a.l ~ .:: ~~ = OJ) <z I.-... a.l ;;., a.l~ Q ::l ~~ "= -; =~ == .- c:c::.s ~ .... = a - ~ ~ III ~ "tl a ...:l ,.; 00 ~ .~ C'\.. ".-4 .~ t) tl '0 Q) ('\-. 'x ~ p..'6" ~ Q) .S S ~ g; 8 p 8 00 ~ ('\-. "C ~ '1:: N8....[58('\-.....g _ _ _ 00 _ ~ ~.... op..l!:l::l~oQ)O _....._... 0 l=l ~ c;:s 0 .1:: .:::'.p l=l _ .Sl t= ~ c;:s S c;:s ~ 0 ...."'O-.....~...Q) c;:s(;..pQ)-:::.....O ~l=lu.....:=,'::'"c;:sl=l _~ ~.........;::- 0 l:: 0 .... 0 "C ~ Q) - c;:s U ~ _.~ 0 ~ 0 _ ~ "C'5="" ~, 00 c;:s.... ~ ~.g ~ =- ~.~ ~ c;:s Q)...t::......p .... ~ 0 - Q).... .... 00 ::l ......- p., _ .~ ,~'r-! 0";::. c;:s _..c~x~oo-o.o c;:s c;:s 00 Q) Q) Q) ~ - .~ Q) ...t::...t:: .......t::.... Q),....-t...... ~ ...... P"""'o4 ...... "'0 r~ @: g .~.~ ~ ~ .E '-' c;:s ~ Q) Q) .....5= g ...t::...t:: c;:s::C::C ~ .... .... .... .... ~........ U "C - ~ .~ .~ ..c ~ ~.~ s.g.o;:: t)t)"CdOc;:s....~~ .... .... Q) l=l l=l .... p..::l ::l ~~e.88~2~~ o o.g Q) Q) If: .~ l=l l=l UUc;:si=Qi=Q<X::088 cd ..ci cJ rei as....... = o .':: ~ "3 I:.l ~ .... u - = o .,:: ~ t o l:l. III a ~ ~ ~ ('\-. c;:s cJ '1:: ('\-. .... .... 00 Q) [5 ~ Q)uf "C ::l .~ ~ ~ E ~ ~ 0.0 - -Q) .S ~ ~ ~ ""Q "C ~ 'eJ '"a 8 ::l 0 c;:s 0.0.... 'Zl .... e. ~ ..c ('\-. ~ 00 c;:s.... 00- ('\-. ~ .... ~ I:.l 1:: "S 23 .Sl 00- g ~ 8. Sl ~ tl ~ C;:S'r-! p....... ~ ~,::l -~::l~S =- ~ ~ 0 ;:! 00 .;: .... ~~'E~'-~OOu ~ ~ c;:s Q) ~ 'eJ ::l lE .... 0.0 too< u..........c c;:s o'Cij c;:s ~ tE '0 ~.b ~ Q)...t:: ..... 0 p...S f-< .e- "C .... () _ "C "C 'C;:; ....s~~o~.Ef-< Q) ....2?,Q)p..uo _oQ)l:....o~ _ .~ ~'I:: Q)'Cij "C.... Q) ...t::oo-s~c;:s~-e ~ 'E ~ Q) ;; ...t::.Sl 0 ~ 13.... ~ ~.t::: 1;;-8 .~ co ~ co.~ ~ 1:: ~ oo...t::~g.ut)oc;:s ~cuQ)lEi:S~~ t>~:..c~ 55 ~ ~:-;:f ~ c;:s f-< ~ ~ 0 ~ CIl _tI)o_-U....~ cd ..ci cJ rei as ....... Q)- U ~ Q) "C .... 00 ..c ::l 00 ~ o - o ~ ~ M CfJ~ ~ij3 ~ - c;:s 0 -5~ E'S p..~ ~ 6i: 0.0 _ o ~ 00 p..o ~ ('\-. .s '.p ;.;;l ~ o.o~ ~ - ~ c;:s 00 .8 ;e~ "C c;:s ::lQ) ~ ~ "gs ::l '"a .::: 0 8 .~ ('\-. oo-~ 0.0 :;oot)oo 'a ~ ~ c;:s 8 l=l .- 0 p...... 00 _ t;:l s.~ 'Q) ('\-. 0 "Sl .... "C ('\-. 00 . U .... 00 ~ 00 - .B .t:", s:-;::: 0 .... OOQ)~ ouU Q) 0 - 00 Q) ;:! - ~-'O 0 .... - ~ .8OQ)OOO..cs p....p b.c Q) U .s .... ::l U Q):sl.... 00 ~ -C;:S::l-o.o~o ~ tl ,9" ~ rSl ::l.... ::l ::l.... ~ 0 "C ~ ~g:5jl58~ cd ..ci cJ rei as .e- .... "; = 01 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o - o .a >> ::t: ~ ~ Q) "C1;; ~ - c;:s Q) _i.s Q) ~ - ~ f-< 0 ~ 0 00- <;-< Ii e o Q) Q) ~....:t: .Sl ~ c;:s .... .. p.. U...t:: Q) ~ooo.o .... Q) c;:s "C~ ~ ~ s... -ca o -;:-, Q)Q)"Cq:: ~ ~ - 0 ::l'1:: ~ ~ 8~1;;2 _ l=l - Q) o _ ~ U _ Q) 0 c;:s 23 .s '.p 'i::: ~'Q) fr ~ _~O<;-< ........$ 0 ~u)c;:s.... ~.... ~ ~ .... ~.... g ~ s ~ s ~ Q) ~ c;:s C;:S>C;:S"C cJScJ8 cd ..c 7 .-; ('\-. 00 ~ - Q) :t: ~ "C o o t;:l <;-< o ~ o t;:l "C ~ c;:s Q) ~ ::l o U o .... 00 ~ .Sl .... c;:s - Q) .... ~ cJ AGEND.~ IrE?;_ NO. ~ PAGE _ d rl- OF Y L.( Q)- ...t:: U .... Q) 00 t = ~ ~ ~ 0 Z e - ... 0 ;;... r. .... -=~~ .~ E-tl.l::= ::;: ~... ~ y ~ ~ ~~ .c U ~Ci5 '; .... c ~ ... e ; = c 0 ~ 0 - l.I:: ... 'i:l .;: ... ... ~ c ~=... ~ ~= ....,1:2 '" r.n... 0 .Q~ e ';~o .,1:2 ~ ~ =~~ ~::J 0 =- >>... :;;t .,1:2 ~ = =!6 ~ ~ ~~ 0... =-r.n c .9 .... ~ - ~ ~ c ~ .9 Q -= ~ ~;:: c ~ C bJl <z -- ~ ~ ~"O Q = ~v:; '= '; c;:: = .- ~.s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - 'i:l ~ = = .,1:2 = o ~ ...., .0 ... '; = 0' '" ~ ~ ~ o - o ~ :I: -:t ~ ..... .s (])~ ~ '"g :g o ~(])~ +-'m......+-' p. ~ ~ ...... I-< (])~ ~~g o~ I-< I-< ~ 0 (]) ~= m~~ == ~ ~ ~ aB~si~ ~~$ ~8~ ~ ~ ~ ~"CI-<o>~ ~~I-< I-<ml-< ~ "C >. i:! ~ 0 <I:: d.S i> -.,~ +-' ro:::l ,.$ (]) ~ ~ 'S ~ = S S ~] 8'S ~ ~ ] .~ ~ .S ~ ;..::::;e s ~ (]) a 5.;3 go ..c ..c .~ (]) I-< ~ so~.....~~..g6l:~~ ~~~ .m~ ~ +-' ro=:::l"C+-'~I-<"""..c...... 001-< ~ ro =~+-,~~m~O~o 1-<=0 (]) ~ ~ ......... I-< s::; "C ~ (]) (]) -:s e ..c (]) I-< ~ 0 ~"C = 0 ~ ~ a ~~ +-' B ::: 0 b.O ...~..... =,.$ ~ I-< ~..... ~ ~ .~ 0 e'>(])~' ~ ~ = .... "C CI:l = ..... +-' ..... ~ +-' I-< w. I-< ~..... (]):::l s..... ~ - p. ~ ~ m (]) :::l (]) "C b.O_ ui 0 = 0 ro (]) .... >::l +-' (]) > m +-':::l 5<' ~ = I-<.a t+:: :::l 8 .... i> "C CI:l P. CI:l ...... ~ ~ o,S 0 4-4 s::; I-< ;:r (]) d = ~ p ~ ~ ~'S"C ui"8 ~ S 0 E = ~ E.....~ '0 a~ = ~ ~ (]) +-' ro "C 0 = CI:l..... ~ B S ... I-< "C :::l CI:l ~ > = ~.CJ I-< 0 ~..c i> m..c (5 0 .~ o 't: ;..:::: '0 .s 8..... ~ .~ b.O _ I-< I-< ..... (]) I-< S ::lrorn::l"C~~~"C::l=O::l ~ -0 ro rn:::l .~:=: >. (]) ~ ~ = 8 .... ~ d .8 ~ -=' "' oo,,"Co..cp......;.::::::l..c ....~s::; 'v ~~ ~ +-' I-< ~ P. "C ~ v P +-' P "!::: 0 (]) ",. "'..... ..c = (]) SU I-< =~ = CI:l......o ::'n I-< '>.: bh ~ .H I-< m .:.'''C +-' ",. ..... +-' ~ (]) 0 CI:l "C -., 0 l:l i> ~ - (]) 0 0 .S] ~ ~ .s ~.-8 m = =.S rn 0 .S '"g 23 ~ .~ ]..... (]),Q "'CI:lI-< CI:l>e+-'CI:lO ",=.d "' =(])... 1-<- ~ - (]) I-< i> = m.~ bO 0 Cii bO S CI:l.~ ~ :::l m 5 ~ ~ Jg & ~ t) .~ ~ i:! =:-8 > =.C;; g.s: t) r;; ~ CI:l W i> w. I-< S ~ = +-' +-' (]) ro "C ~ CI:l - :=: ..... ~ I-< p...c D~Qr;;~~8aS~D~~D~&~~~~~ -d Q) ...... 00..d ....; ~ ....... ~ ~~~ ~~ -- -- -- -- .0 ... '; = 0' '" :< b.O = ..... +-' m ..... >< (]) = CI:l o +-' i ~ "'.::l ::l m+-' ~ =i:! ..8 .s ~ ~ =:::ld' Q) o ",.:=: s::; > ~ = 0 (]) (]) 1-<0i5.+-' - o.~ 0 i ~ "C CI:l +-' :::l ",. ..... I-<'Om+-,m 0 .g.s: ~.~ ~ = ~>,~g] ~ +-' .~. Q) s::; (]) ",. ~ m ~ ~ +-'~ _ ,.!!l (]) ~a~=~ (])m ;"::::V(])s= ~B ~'='.5 (]).9 (]) (]) 0" CI:l..... > +-' m ~, "C m 0 ~ '0 0' S~5S;B ;:~ CI:l~mI-<O ~- (]).~ (])..... ~ m (]) +-'.0' m CI:l (]) ~ CI:l rn ...::l ~ Q I-< ~... ~ Q O-~~(])O~~ >~~~~Z~~ ell .c cJ-d\C eIl.c ",. (]) +-' ro .13 "CJ I-< o .n ~ ~ ~ o - o ... =:l r.:. ",. ...... ~ o ..... m +-' ~ 'S +-' ::l ~ S ..c S b.O 8 = - ~ i:! ..E "': .s ~ ~ CI:l .S "tl = ~ m~ I-< ~"C 0 ..... ~ Cf.J 1rl ;.0 .~ ~uia:l (]) ~ p. I-< S m i:! ..... '"g = ~ ~ ~ui5b ~ ~'r;; I-< (]) (]) -:ssg"C 1-<..... >. o ...::::::: I-<..c CI:l (]) m ~ b.O t+:: ..Q = m~ +-' CI:l +-' ~ "C=~ ~.a< ell .c AGEND!\ ITEJil NO. PACE d- 3 II") - ~ OF '1 Y .... ~ = l:l. = ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ )oool 0 Z e -- I-- - a~t 0 ~ .... '" E9~= :f.i (Il!5 ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ 5h)oool .c u ~Ci5 -; .... -- I-- = ~ .... e a = = 0 ~ 0 - !.I:l..= '0 .;: .... = ~ = 5h blj ~ ~ .....,;:l ~ VJ.... 0 .Q~ ~ ';(IlO ..= (Il ~ =~J:: ~~ 0 ~ -- I-- >>.... =;at .,;:l Cj = =!5 ~ \0 ~ 5h)oool 0.... - ~VJ -- f-- = .9 .... e'5 - e'5 1j = ~ o~ :c ~ e'5 .. lo<: .. ~.... = e'5 = tl.l) <z -...... ~ .... ~'C ~ = tl.l).... =CFJ 'c -; =~ = .. c:::.s ,...., '0 ~ = = .,;:l = o Cj '-' "0 c ell ~ ;: C'I-. '+-0 ~ o 0 a :'06 .. +" 0 g ~ "0 c 0) 0 r... ...... bO ~ ;@ .~ ::l S c:l r... = 0 ...... -....; c;j ~ ~ :~ ~ ~ 1ii ...c ;tj "C ~ c ...... ,;s ;:a t:) C'I-. ~ ;:~;> t)~t) ~~~ u "Cl . 00 ~ ell .E ~c;:; ...c ~ .~~ c 0) 0) ~ ~...... 00.... r... 0) o...c +" ell en +" 0) 00 ell '!> 0) .~ ..5 13 ~ ~ 0) en C ell ell t) 0) ~~ ~..c ~ ~ S '0 a .:s blj .... ~ 0.. (Il Cj .,;:l ~ .;; (Il ~ < ~ o - o .... = r-:- C'I-. 0) r... ell bl "0 c ell +" ...c :g - 0) +" ell 0) r... U ~ blj = .... (Il = o :I: '0 a = o .,;:l = "3 l:l. o ~ o .-4 c ~ .9 c +" ...... ell en "3 ::l 0. .2 8. 5 0) - >> ;e ~ ~ .e .9 ~ r... r... r... tB o :.e ell c;j 13 .!: a ~ 3 '6:0 c ~ ~ ell ~ c;j .s ~ '8 ..c:l bf lE ~ .s o 0 en "C 50 S ~ c;j ...c ~ '.c:: gf ~ c ...... ell +" ~C'I-' ti .~ - oo,..c >< .i:: c ::l ~ 0) ~.9 00 +:I 0) "3~~~~ S .= .g .~ e. 8~.s]a ~ ..ci u .... 13 C'I-. ...... en ~ +" "0 lE ~ ~ C'I-. 0) +" N ~ .s ~ ~ ell r... ~ ..c:l pO ~ +J - 0 c;j a ..E 00 0) ...... 0) ~ ...c ~ti - c;j ~ ~ ~ ~ 'g ~ en ell .S ~ o g.s s 8 (Il > en ~ .s ~ ~~ 0 > ~ s ~ C'I-. t '; 0) en '+-o~g ~ b ~ ~ Oc;j 0 Cj .s ~ ~ .E' ~ ~ ~ ~ o~ r;:: r... r... 0 'O~;: ~B~] = ...c ~ r;:: ..E 'Q. .... = .1:;;0) ~'+-ooo """ >> ;:; r... ell ~ C\I blj +" ~C'I-. 0) 0)...... S ~ ~0~...c,..c0) ~ ...... c C +" "0 00 = ~O)cO)"3Q "S ~ OOOellOOOX U ~ u~s.s;:~ ~ .-4 ~..ci u "Cl .-4 ~ .~ o +" 00 ...... ...c r... o ci C'I-. ~ 00 ...... 0) ~ .E C'I-. - ell 00 o :> 0) 1l c;j:g ~ ~'"g ell .:t:: r... c;j ::l~ ~ ~ ell -El> .~ ~ ..9 cO o o:S:g 1:: 0) 0 2 ~:~ ~,,"..s~ o.OOcr... ...c ~ ::l t) r-. r-. .j...oI-1""'4 ::l ::l ~ r... ti 0 ~O) ti 01"""4 00 Q) o~ ~ ~ ..ci u (Il ~ .... .... .... - .,;:l ~ '0 a (Il ~ Cj .f ~ VJ ~ .... - ~ ~ M .-4 C'I-. C'I-. a c...... o+" '.c:: ~ ~+" 0) 0 b ~~ ~O)- _ ~ 0 0)...... 0 .~ 'Oil ~~CFJ ~..cu AGEND,' ITEM NO. ~ PAGE .:) 'i OF ~ e .. o ~ .... .~ :; C"l ~ .c U -; .... = ~ e = o .. 'S; = r"l = .~ .... ~ .. ~ c:i ~~ :c 011 ~ ,~ ~~ = efl <~ ........ ~ .... ~'O Q = ~oo .= -; =:c = ,- ~.s a~t E9C.l= ~~~ ~ ~C15~ ... a = ~ .0 'tl ... ~ ~ 6b ~~ ....+:J "" r.rJ... 0 ,e.~ e ";rIlO '+:J rIl C.l =~~ ~~ o ~ >>... ::;lat '+:J C.l = =$ ~ ~ 6b~ 0... ~r.rJ t = ~ ~ o Z ~~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ,-.. 'tl ~ = = '+:J = o C.l '-' rIl ~ '+:J ... - '+:J ~ 'tl a rIl ~ C.l 'f ~ r.rJ C.l '.. - .g ~ M '1"4 1-1 Q) -:s s::= s o 0 "C ,~ - s::= '!::: .s ~ ~ ~ rJ1 1j "C ~ ..... s::= ~ ,~ ~ ~ "C ~ - -= "g ..s Q) 0 ~ .s ('-, ~ a ~ a ~ s ~ ~ ~ Q) "C s::= CJ "C s::= 8.s "C ~:;.. ~ .Q'~ a-r ~ ~ c;; <) Q) ~ ~.~ - ('-. ~ 6- I:. g ~ ~ - Q) ,~ S - Q) ~ ~ bO ('-. Q) ~ ('-, 'tii ('-. .:=l - ,S ,~ ~ ~ II ~"; ~ s -g~ r/l_ asgsg, ~ - .~ s::= ~ ..... - e. S <) <) 0 s::= <) 0 ~...... ('-. s::= ~ .~ 0 .~.....:.= 0 ~ 8 -1"""'4 +..I ....... ~ r.n - '..J Q) Q) ~"; ~i3bO :::-_Q)<).pQ) g s::= ~,~ ~ ~ 0..... s::=.~ > .~ 0 bi; s::= _ ('-, _ Q) ~ ~ ~ 2, ..... .~ _ ~ 0 ~ 0 >:" !> s::= ~ ~ ~'tii~~S S Cil;>Q)~- ~Q)Q)- ";Q)-s::="C..... Q) <) - ~ .s S <) ..... ~'~:.=1'S'S-:S 2 1rl 0 ~ ,C; ~ ;g, Q) i::! 0 ~ i::! 0 ...... -p.,z""...... ~Cf)OCf)""'''C . --d Q)..... bb...d .,..; .,..:. ~ ......; S ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ AGEND{\ PACE t-- ....... I,m. to ::>~ OF y Y ('-, ~ Q) <) .~ ('-. t) $ ...... ~ ~..... S ~ 0"""'0'" _Q)8. :>-.'~ ..... Q) ~ .....:;::l ...,......... +..I Q) .... I""""l ~ '~......o g ~ - - ~ s :- g c;; .~.~ - 0 s::= 15 S::=.Q -5 ~ ~ 'tii 'tii SO";.~ ..c:: Q) C;; .::: t) O"'!::::3:.=1[lS~ ~S~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ Q) ..c 'S '8 Q) s::= "C ;> ...... ~..c:: 0 .s S ~'i:: 6J 8 :> .e3 Q) 6h Q) ~ s::= ~ - Q) .~ 'S; ..a <) t) Q)..c::~Q)S::=0~ -5~s::= ~Q) "C ..... ,~ ..... Q) ..... - ~ Q) .~ ('-, Q)'~ Q)~~~S::=O Q)Q) "C o <) ~ ~ ':;:l ~.,...,.. 0 ~ - -....... s::= ..... ~.~ ....... ~ .....;:: ~..c ~,~ ";"C;>-:S~~S ";Q).....i::!-=- .~ Q) - ~ ~ "C ...... '~"'i' ~ Q) Q) 0 -= - 0.$ "C Q) 0 .('-~. -= b!: -:s "C S ..... Q) >-...c:: Q) Q) - ~ Q) s::= ~'Cil ~ <) .....:::=~>-Q)Q)0.....0.....s::=....~ o ~ q:: Q) :>: ~- ..... 0 - <) 0 8'~ ~'p ................. ~ ~ ~...... ~ <)..... "C Q) s::= ~ bO.~ ~ s:.a Q) 0 ~.... ;> Q) ..c:: ~ Q).S s::= s::= ~ Q)..c:: ~ s,.!:; s::= ~ ..... ..... ~ s::= ~ Q) >< - ..... :::-.~ Q) Q) - ~ 15 ~.~ S _ Q) 0. ~ ~ ~.,5 ~ ~ ~ ~ <) ~ S 0 -= 15 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~"C ..c:: ~ui::: 0 Q) ~:;....c:: >..c::-..c:: ~ t) -= .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s t) "g t) S t) 3 .~ Q)s ~.Q) ~s ~ ~~ ,~o'~,~ B .~o -= o .... ~ s .~ "C 0 ~ - s::= ~ !>.~ "0 ..c:: - - ..... - ..... ~ 0 Q) ;> s::= .~ ~ ~ Q) ~ ~ ~ ~ Q) _ '+'l 0 ~ Q) Q).~ Q) -:S Q)..c Q)..c -:S '!> ;a] 2i ~ ~ 8 -:S 0 -:S "C~ -:S f7l ~ a'l ~ ~ g. -= i::!.s @ a'l.i a'l:~ a'l ~ g o Q) ... _ ~ Q).~ c;; 0 ~ 0 s 0 ~ Q) o:t ~ -:S 0 "C -a-:s Q) U ~ ~ ~ :.=1 ~ <) is. '1"4 ~ ..c <) "C ~ C.l a C.l q:: .~ ... r.rJ c.., o rIl ~ ;a = ... ~ t- o ~ 'tl a ~ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis F. Environmental Analysis 1. Land Use Planning a. Conflict with General Plan or Zoning Less than Significant - The City of Lake Elsinore ( City) is currently performing a General Plan Update. Annexation of these parcels does not impact the existing General Plan or draft General Plan Update, as the properties in the annexation are within the Sphere of Influence and included in the General Plan and draft General Plan Update. The parcels must be pre- zoned by City Council, and an annexation application must be submitted to Riverside LAFCO as a condition of the Pacific Clay annexation. See Section II. C. Project Description for details regarding existing and proposed land uses and zoning, and LEMC text amendments. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s8g-acre proposed annexation. Should any development be proposed in the future, the City would require consistency with the General Plan land use and zoning designations at that time. Impacts are considered less than significant. b. Conflicts with Environmental Plans or Policies No Impacts - The City participates in the Riverside County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) through use of the LEAP (Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process). The annexation action does not authorize the disturbance of land and therefore would not impact any covered species or habitat. Future development will be reviewed for specific impacts on the land and will require completion of biological studies. No impacts to any established environmental plans or policies are anticipated due to the annexation or LEMC text amendments. The area proposed for annexation does lie within MSHCP Criteria Cells and all future development would be required to undergo a joint project review with the Regional Conservation Authority. c. Compatibility with Onsite Land Uses Less Than Significant - There is no development plan at this time included as part of the proposed annexation. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be expected to impact onsite land uses when considering its minor contribution to the entire s8g-acre proposed annexation. The City would require that any future development plans be consistent with existing land uses and zoning at that time. Further, approval of the two (2) proposed text amendments would result in minor revisions to ordinances in the LEMC thus ensuring compatibility with on site land uses. Less than significant impacts would be expected. PACE ;;) p ro OF 11 y 18 f,~GtND,C\. iJO. Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis d. Compatibility with Neighborhood Land Uses Less than Significant - The Pacific Clay Company has active mineral (clay and gravel) extraction, rock crushing, and brick and pottery fabrication off site to the north of the proposed annexation. To the west is the Cleveland National Forest, which consists of rugged open space. To the south is a mixture of developed residential and open space within the City of Lake Elsinore. To the east is Lake Street and residential development. There is no development plan at this time included as part of the proposed annexation. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be expected to impact neighboring land uses when considering its minor contribution to the entire s8g-acre proposed annexation. The City would require that any future development plans be consistent with neighboring land uses and zoning at that time. Further, approval of the two (2) proposed text amendments would result in minor revisions to ordinances in the LEMC thus ensuring compatibility with neighbohood land uses. Impacts would be considered less than significant. e. Affect Agriculture No Impacts - There are no designated agricultural uses within any of the parcels proposed for annexation nor are there any agricultural overlays covering these parcels. No impacts to agricultural land would be expected. f. Disrupt Established Community Less than Significant - The area consists of scattered residences in a rural setting, including areas of open space. There is no development plan at this time included as part of the proposed annexation. Neither the proposed annexation nor approval of the text amendments would disrupt an established community. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be expected to disrupt the rural communities in the area considering its minor contribution to the entire s8g-acre proposed annexation. The City would require that any future development plans be consistent with neighboring land uses and zoning at that time. The residences within and adjacent to the proposed annexation were invited to attend a public outreach meeting held June 28, 2007. Further, they will be invited to comment on this document, as well as any CEQA documents required as part of future development projects. Impacts would be considered less than significant. 2. Transportation / Circulation a. Increase Trips or Congestion Less Than Significant - While the existing County land uses and 19 AGENDA ITEM NO. h PAGE d -, OF L.{ l.{ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis zoning are comparable to the City's land use and zoning proposed as part of this annexation, the change from the County's RR designation to the City's VLD designation would result in an increase of 43 DU over existing conditions. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not result in a substantial increase in population when considering its minor contribution to the entire 589-acre proposed annexation. Therefore, approval of the annexation would not result in a substantial increase in traffic trips or congestion, nor would it affect the existing Levels of Service in the area. There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require a traffic impact analysis as part of the environmental assessment process, and any impacts and mitigation related to traffic would be identified as required per CEQA. Traffic impacts resulting from the project as proposed would be considered less than significant. b. Safety Hazards No Impacts - There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require a traffic impact analysis, including an evaluation of safety hazards, as part of the environmental assessment process. Any impacts and mitigation related to traffic safety hazards would be identified as required per CEQA. There are no anticipated traffic safety hazards resulting from the project as proposed. c. Access No Impacts - There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require a traffic impact analysis, including an evaluation of access as part of the environmental assessment process. Any impacts and mitigation related to access would be identified as required per CEQA. There are no anticipated traffic access issues resulting from the projects as proposed. d. Parking No Impacts - There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require a traffic impact analysis, including an evaluation of adequate parking as part of the environmental assessment process. Any impacts and mitigation related to parking would be identified as required per CEQA and City ordinances. There are no anticipated parking issues resulting 20 AGEimA m:t'vi NO. Co PAGE G-Cd OF Vi Lf .... Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis from the project as proposed. e. Conflict with Alternative Transportation Policies No Impacts - There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. However, the changes in allowable densities resulting from the changes from County to City land uses would result in an additional 43 DU. The increase in 43 DU would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s89-acre proposed annexation. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require a traffic impact analysis, including an assurance that there would be no conflict with alternative transportation policies. Any mitigation necessary to ensure that there would be no conflicts would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated conflicts resulting from the project as proposed. f. Rail, Waterborne, or Air Traffic Impacts No Impacts - There are no rail, waterborne, or air traffic facilities within or in the vicinity of the parcels proposed for annexation. Therefore, these issue areas are outside the scope of this project. No impacts are expected. 3. Geology a. Seismic Hazards No Impacts - The City and surrounding areas are occasionally subject to seismic ground-shaking. There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that a geotechnical and faults study be included as part of the environmental assessment process. Further, any additional DUs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and design requirements as any other proposed development. Any impacts and mitigation related to seismic hazards would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated seismic issues resulting from the project as proposed. b. Unique Geologic Features No Impacts - The proposed project site does not appear to encompass any unique geologic features. Further, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that a geotechnical study be included as part of 21 AGENDA ITEM NO. (0 PAGE d cr OF Y y Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis the environmental assessment process. Any impacts and mitigation related to unique geologic features would be identified as required per CEQA. There are no anticipated issues resulting from the project as proposed. c. Landslides or Mudflows No Impacts - With any project located within a site encompassing hills or mountainous areas, there is a potential for landslides or mudflows. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that a geotechnical study be included as part of the environmental assessment process. Further, any additional DDs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and design requirements as any other proposed development. Any impacts and mitigation related to landslides or mudflows would be identified as required per CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to landslides or mudflows resulting from the project as proposed. d. Geologic or Soils Impacts No Impacts - There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any evaluation of soils impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that a geotechnical and soils study be included as part of the environmental assessment process. Further, any additional DDs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and design requirements as any other proposed development. Any impacts and mitigation related to seismic hazards would be identified as required per CEQA. There are no anticipated soils impacts resulting from the project as proposed. e. Erosion Impacts No Impacts - There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any evaluation of erosion impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that a geotechnical study be included as part of the environmental assessment process. In addition, the future development project would require compliance with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulations, including use of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce or avoid the potential for erosion. Further, any additional DDs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and requirements as any other proposed development. There are no anticipated erosion impacts resulting from the project as proposed. 22 AGENDA m::M NO. PAGE ':3 0 OF ~ v1Y Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis 4. HydrologyfWater Quality a. Drainage Changes No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for changes in drainage patterns and other hydrologic features. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that a hydrology study and drainage plan be included as part of the environmental assessment process. Further, any additional DDs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and requirements as any other proposed development. Any impacts and mitigation related to drainage and other hydrologic features would be identified as required per CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to drainage or other hydrologic features resulting from the project as proposed. b. Changes to Absorption Rates No Impacts - See discussion in 4.a. above. c. Flood Course Alteration No Impacts - See discussion in 4.a. above. d. Surface Water No Impacts - See discussion in 4.a. above. e. Water Quality No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for impacts to water quality and beneficial uses due to increased urbanization as well as potential impacts from erosion and sedimentation. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that a water quality management plan be prepared as part of the environmental assessment process. Any impacts to water quality and beneficial uses as well as required mitigation would be identified as required per CEQA. The applicant would also be required to comply with NPDES regulations, including the preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. Further, any additional DDs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and requirements as any other proposed development. There are no 23 AGENDA iTEM NO. l, PAGE~OF 4 '1 Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis anticipated Issues related to water quality resulting from the project as proposed. f. Groundwater Alteration No Impacts - See discussion in 4.a. above. g. Groundwater Quality Through Additions No Impacts - See discussion in 4.e. above. h. Groundwater Quality Through Runoff No Impacts - See discussion in 4.e. above. i. Water Reduction No Impacts - See discussion in 4.a. above. j. Flood Hazards No Impacts - See discussion in 4.a. above. 5. Air Quality a. Air Quality Violations No Impacts - While the existing County land uses and zoning are comparable to the City's land use and zoning proposed as part of this annexation, the change from the County's RR designation to the City's VLD designation would result in an increase of 43 DU over existing conditions. The increase in 43 D U resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not result in a substantial increase in population when considering its minor contribution to the entire s89-acre proposed annexation. Therefore, no additional effects to air quality would be expected from the proposed annexation over those already anticipated in the County General Plan or any regional Air Quality Management Plan. With any future development there would be a potential for changes in air quality resulting from construction activities and increased traffic. Currently there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that an air quality analysis be prepared as part of the environmental assessment process. Any impacts and mitigation related to air quality would be identified as required. There are no anticipated issues related to air quality resulting from the project as proposed. 24 "IDA !T~">" NO t AGEl\] I t::nl .~_ _______ PAGE 3d OF ~lj_-__ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis b. Sensitive Receptors No Impacts - See discussion in 5.a. above. c. Regional Air Quality No Impacts - See discussion in 5.a. above. d. Objectionable Odors No Impacts - See discussion in 5.a. above. 6. Noise a. Noise Levels No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for changes in noise levels. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that a Noise Study be prepared as part of the environmental assessment process. Further, any additional DUs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and requirements as any other proposed development. Any impacts and mitigation related to noise would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to noise resulting from the project as proposed. b. Noise Exposures No Impacts - See discussion in 6.a. above. 7. Biology a. Endangered or Threatened Species No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for effects to biological resources within and in the vicinity of the project site. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require preparation of all required biological studies as part of the environmental assessment process. In addition, all development projects in the City are required to be consistent with the MSHCP. Further, any additional DUs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and requirements as any other proposed development. Any future impacts and 25 AGENDA m:ril NO.___ -0 3 -=3 0"- Y y PACE r ___.___ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis mitigation related to biological resources would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to biological resources resulting from the project as proposed. b. Natural Communities No Impacts - See discussion in 7.a. above. c. Wetland Habitat No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for affects to wetlands or other jurisdictional waters within and in the vicinity of the project site. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that any wetlands or jurisdictional waters be evaluated as part of the environmental assessment process. In addition, the MSHCP requires an analysis of any potential riverine/riparian and vernal pools on-site. Any impacts and mitigation related to these resources would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to wetlands or jurisdictional waters resulting from the project as proposed. 8. Aesthetics a. Scenic Vista or Highway No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for changes in scenic resources. However, there are no designated scenic vistas or scenic highways within or adjacent to the project area. There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that an evaluation for scenic vistas and highways be included as part of the environmental assessment process. The increase in 43 DU over what is currently allowed by the existing County land uses would not be expected to affect any related scenic resources. Any impacts and mitigation related to scenic resources would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to aesthetics resulting from the project as proposed. b. Aesthetic Affect No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for changes in scenic resources. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City 26 AGb2D)~\ dT:~.i NO. Co_ PAGE~OF ~ 4 Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis could require that a visual simulation be prepared as part of the environmental assessment process. The increase in 43 DU over what is currently allowed by the existing County land uses would not be expected to affect any related scenic resources, and would be required to be included in any studies required of future development projects. Any impacts and mitigation related to aesthetics would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to aesthetics resulting from the project as proposed. 9. Light and Glare a. Light and Glare No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for additional light and glare from increased development. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the applicant would be required to comply with City design requirements as part of the environmental assessment process. Further, any additional DUs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same requirements as any other proposed development. Any impacts and mitigation related to light and glare would be identified as required per CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to light and glare at this time. lo.Population and Housing a. Exceed Population Projections No Impacts - With any approved development there is a potential for population growth. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any construction of residential or commercial development that could generate growth at this time. Further, the increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s89-acre proposed annexation. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that all impacts related to population increases and growth be evaluated as part of the environmental assessment process. Any related impacts and mitigation would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to population and growth resulting from the project as proposed. b. Induce Substantial Growth No Impacts. See discussion in lO.a. above. 27 AGENDA ITEM NO. " PAGE 3\ 0;: V\ y Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis c. Displace Housing No Impacts - The proposed project does not include any action that could displace housing. No development plan is included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that any potential displacement of housing be evaluated as part of the environmental assessment process. Any related impacts and mitigation would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated housing issues resulting from the project as proposed. 11. Energy and Mineral Resources a. Energy Conservation Plans Less than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any other use or disturbance ofland. The resulting increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s8g-acre proposed annexation, and would not be expected to affect any energy conservation plan. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on energy conservation. Future development will be subject to state and local requirements. Impacts are expected to be less than significant. b. Non-Renewable Energy Resources Less than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any other use or disturbance ofland. The resulting increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s8g-acre proposed annexation, and would not be expected to affect non-renewable energy resources. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on these resources. Future development will be subject to state and local requirements. Impacts are expected to be less than significant. c. Future Value of Resources Less Than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any other use or disturbance ofland. The resulting increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s8g-acre proposed annexation, and would not be expected to affect the future value of resources. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on these resources. Future development will be subject to state and local requirements. Impacts are expected to be less than significant. 28 ACENDA ITEM NO. 'e; PACE :3 ~ OF "1 Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis d. Potential Health Hazards No Impacts - The proposed project does not approve any other use or disturbance of land. The resulting increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s8g-acre proposed annexation, and would not be expected to result in potential health hazards. Future development will be reviewed for potential health hazards, and will be subject to federal, state and local requirements. No impacts are expected to result from the project as proposed. 12. Cultural Resources a. Paleontological, Archeological, or Historical Resources No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for effects on paleontological, archeological, or historic resources. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require preparation of all required paleontological, archeological, or historic resources studies as part of the environmental assessment process. Further, any additional DUs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and requirements as any other proposed development. Any impacts and mitigation related to these resources would be identified as required per CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to cultural resources resulting from the project as proposed. b. Ethnic Cultural Values No Impacts - As discussed above in 12.a., and related to cultural resources impacts, no impacts to ethnic cultural values would be expected c. Religious or Sacred Uses No Impacts - As discussed above in 12.a., and related to cultural resources impacts, no impacts to religious or scared uses would be expected. 13. Public Services and Utilities a. Fire Protection Less than Significant - Fire protection for both the City and the County is provided by the Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD). The proposed project will not result in a jurisdiction change in service provider. The proposed annexation will not affect man-power needs, but rather funding. 29 AGENDA rn:r~l NO.~ (0 Y y PAGE 3 7 OF Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis Upon annexation, the City of Lake Elsinore will provide fire protection through contract with Riverside County Fire Department, and tax revenue collected by the City of Lake Elsinore will be used to provide fire protection services for the annexed area. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s8g-acre proposed annexation. At this time, no development plans have been submitted as part of this project. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and fire protection. Less than significant impacts are expected. b. Police Protection Less than Significant - Police protection is provided for the both the City and County through the Riverside County Sheriffs Department. The proposed annexation does not affect man-power needs, but rather funding. The City of Lake Elsinore will provide police protection for the proposed annexation parcels through a contract with Riverside County Sheriffs Department. Tax revenue generated will provide funding for the City to provide Police Protection services through the Riverside County Sheriffs Department. The increase in 43 D U resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s8g-acre proposed annexation. As no new development is submitted at this time as part of the proposed project, future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and police protection, and is subject to state and City codes. Less than significant impacts are expected. c. Schools Less than Significant - The City of Lake Elsinore School District provides public education services for both the City and County in their district boundaries. The impact of annexation will not affect school facilities or man- power needs, but rather funding. Tax revenue collected from the parcels in the proposed annexation will provide educational services for the annexed area. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s8g-acre proposed annexation. At this time, no development plans have been submitted as part of this project. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and education services, and is subject to City development impact fees. Less than significant impacts are expected. d. Recreation Less than Significant - The City of Lake Elsinore Community Services Department provides and maintains parks, various sports courts and fields. 30 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE '3 e <0 OF~ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis Recreation activities, such as adult education, youth sports and groups, and a skate park are also provided to residents of the City of Lake Elsinore. The impact of annexation will not affect the facilities or man-power needs, but rather funding. Tax revenue will be generated directly for the City of Lake Elsinore in order to provide parks and recreational services for residents of the City, which will include the annexed area. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase in use of recreational facilities when considering its minor contribution to the entire s89-acre proposed annexation. At this time, no development plans have been submitted as part of this project. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and parks and recreational services, and is subject to the State of California Quimby Act and City development Quimby in-lieu fees. Less than significant impacts are expected. e. Power Less than Significant - Southern California Edison (SCE) currently provides electrical power to the proposed annexation, and the annexation will have no foreseeable effect on power within the City of Lake Elsinore. No new development plans have been submitted, and future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and power / electrical distribution and supply, including those resulting from the increase in 43 additional DU. Less than significant impacts are expected. f. Natural Gas Less than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any use that would allow the disturbance of land at this time. Southern California Gas Company (SCGC) provides natural gas service to the region. While the annexation properties currently do not receive service, the annexation of these parcels will have little effect on natural gas distribution and supply, including the increase in use resulting from the additional 43 DU. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and natural gas supply. Less than significant impacts are expected. g. Communications Systems Less than Significant - Verizon provides telecommunication service to the region and properties of the proposed annexation. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and telecommunication services, including those resulting from the increase in 43 additional DU. Less than significant impacts are expected. 31 AGENDA ITEM NO. b PACE 3 C, OF -\I:~:C= Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis h. Water Less than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any use that would allow the disturbance of land at this time. Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District provides water service to the region and the proposed annexation. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and municipal water service, including those resulting from the increase in 43 additional DU. Less than significant impacts are expected. i. Sewer Less than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any use that would allow the disturbance of land at this time. Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District provides sewer service to the region and the proposed annexation. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and municipal sewer service, including those resulting from the increase in 43 additional DU. Less than significant impacts are expected. j. Storm Water Drainage Less than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any use that would allow the disturbance of land at this time. Lake Elsinore Department of Public Works maintains the City's storm water collection and drainage system. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and storm drain systems, including those resulting from the increase in 43 additional DU. Less than significant impacts are expected. k. Solid Waste and Disposal Less than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any use that would allow the disturbance of land at this time. CR&R is the franchised solid waste hauler for the City of Lake Elsinore Department. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and solid waste disposal, including those resulting from the increase in 43 additional DU. Less than significant impacts are expected. 1. Maintenance Less than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any use that would allow the disturbance of land at this time. Lake Elsinore Department of Public Works maintains the City's streets, signs, lights, and signals. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and infrastructure maintenance, including those resulting 32 AGEl'JDA ITEM NO. PAGE Y 0 b OF L1 Y Running Deer Annexation Environmental Analysis Initial Study / Negative Declaration from the increase in 43 additional DU. Less than significant impacts are expected. m. Other Governmental Services Less Than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any use that would allow the disturbance of land at this time. The City of Lake Elsinore provides other municipal services, as mentioned, streets, parks, and schools, already utilized by the properties proposed for annexation. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public all governmental services, including those resulting from the increase in 43 additional DU. Less than significant impacts are expected. 33 Mvt}";Dj:~ iTEtJi NO. PAGE If' J fa OF ~ Y Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis 14. Mandatory Findings of Significance The following are Mandatory Findings of Significance in accordance with Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines. 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? Less Than Significant Implementation of the proposed project includes approval of an annexation and two (2) text amendments. Because there is no development plan associated with the proposed project, it will not 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. As detailed in Section 7 Biological Resources, the proposed project will not result in any significant impacts to biological resources. Additionally, as detailed in Section 12 Cultural Resources, the proposed project will not result in any impacts to historical or archaeological resources with implementation. As a result of changes from County to City land uses, there will be an allowable increase of 43 DU. However, the project footprint as it would relate to biological and cultural resource impacts would be the same with or without the additional 43 DU. Therefore, a less than significant impact is identified. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) Less Than Significant Impact Implementation of the proposed project includes approval of an annexation and two (2) text amendments. Because there is no development plan associated with the proposed project, and based upon the analysis in the Initial Study, implementation of the proposed project would not result in impacts that are cumulatively considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of other projects. As a result of changes from County to City land uses, there will be an allowable increase of 43 DU. However, this would not be considered substantial within the overall s8g-acre project site. Therefore, a less than significant impact is identified. 34 AGENDA ITEM NO. ro PACE Y;)- OF LJ \..f Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less Than Significant Impact Implementation of the proposed project includes approval of an annexation and two (2) text amendments. Because there is no development plan associated with the proposed project, and based upon the analysis in the Initial Study, implementation of the proposed project would not result in impacts that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. As a result of changes from County to City land uses, there will be an allowable increase of 43 DU. However, this would not be considered substantial within the overall s89-acre project site. Therefore, a less than significant impact is identified. 35 AGEND.,o, iTEi\li NO. (:; PACE \.1:3 OF ~ \.4 Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Draft Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis 15. Persons and Organizations Consulted Riverside County Sheriffs Department Lake Elsinore Sheriffs Station 333 Limited Avenue Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Contact: Sergeant Vincent Scarpino Riverside County Fire Department Planning Section 4080 Lemon St., 2nd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Contact: Tracey Hobday / Fire Marshal Elsinore Fire Station - Station No. 10 401 Graham Avenue Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Contact: Steve Gallegos / City Fire Chief Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District P.O. Box 3000 31315 Chaney Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Contact: Cher Quinones Riverside County Municipal Waste Management Department C R & R Incorporated 10910 Dawson Canyon Rd. Corona, CA 91719 Riverside County Transportation and Land Management Agency 4080 Lemon St., 8th Floor Riverside, CA 92501 36 Co AGENDA. iTEM N'),~ PACE~OF - - CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: OCTOBER 16, 2007 KIRT A. COURY, PROJECT PLANNER PREPARED BY: PROJECT: DELETING AND RESERVING CHAPTER 17.06 OF THE LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING THE RESOURCE CONSERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT APPLlCANT/: OWNER CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, 130 S. MAIN STREET, LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530 PROJECT REQUEST Staff requests that the Planning Commission consider deleting and reserving Chapter 17.06 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code regarding the Resource Conservation Overlay District and that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve the ordinance deleting and reserving Chapter 17.06. In addition, it is requested that the Planning Commission consider and make a recommendation that the City Council adopt the proposed Negative Declaration finding that the deletion of the Resource Conservation Overlay Ordinance has no environmental impacts. PROJECT BACKGROUND The City Council recently added Chapter 17.61 to the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code establishing the M-3 Mineral Resources and Related Manufacturing District, the purpose of which is to accommodate mineral resource extraction and related manufacturing specifically to expand both the economic base and employment opportunities of the City. DISCUSSION Addition of the new Chapter 17.61 rendered the terms of Chapter 17.06 superfluous and unnecessary because Chapter 17.61 more thoroughly outlines the application process and the regulations regarding treatment and extraction of natural resources within the City's limits. "~I\ l.'~~"; j,1!,,\ ( AGENth.\. .11.:...1 ,'e,"'.. '1 ( ".- I 3 ... ;""..,.-. il !;- r1l". ..'~ '.... r-T~.._",________ __ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DELETION OF CHAPTER 17.06 OF THE LEMC REGARDING THE RESOURCE CONSERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT OCTOBER 16, 2007 Therefore, the City wishes to delete Chapter 17.06 and reserve that Chapter for possible future overlay zones. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION In accordance with Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 15070, a Negative Declaration was prepared for the deletion and reservation of Chapter 17.06 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. Staff determined that a Negative Declaration was appropriate because the initial study conducted for the project suggested that the project would not have a significant effect on the environment. The Negative Declaration is complete and acceptable and contains all of the information required by the California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Pub. Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.: "CEQA") and the CEQA Guidelines. The Negative Declaration was properly circulated for public review and comment in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15073 and 15105. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2007 -_ recommending the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore adopt an ordinance deleting and reserving Chapter 17.06 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (Resource Conservation Overlay Chapter) and adopt a Negative Declaration therefor. These recommendations are based on the Resolution, findings, exhibits attached to this Staff Report. PREPARED BY: KIRT A. COURY, PROJECT PLANNE~ APPROVED BY: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, ()/l/lll /' DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT " V Y ~ . ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution No. 2007-_ recommending the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore adopt an ordinance deleting and reserving Chapter 17.06 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (Resource Conservation Overlay Chapter) and adopt a Negative Declaration therefor. 2. Initial Study/Negative Declaration AGENDA ITEM NO. Pf-\.GE d- ( OF y) RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ADOPT AN ORDINANCE DELETING AND RESERVING CHAPTER 17.06 OF THE LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING THE RESOURCE CONSERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT AND ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION THEREFOR WHEREAS, Section 17.06.010 establishes the Resource Conservation Overlay District, the purpose of which is to provide for the preservation and conservation of various natural resources in order to satisfy immediate and long-term public and private objectives; and WHEREAS, the City Council recently added Chapter 17.61 to the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code establishing the M-3 Mineral Resources and Related Manufacturing District, the purpose of which is to accommodate mineral resource extraction and related manufacturing specifically to expand both the economic base and employment opportunities of the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to delete Chapter 17.06 and reserve that Chapter for possible future overlay zones; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 15063 of the State Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Sections 15000 et seq.: "CEQA Guidelines"), the City, as lead agency, prepared an Initial Study to determine if the proposed text amendment would have a significant effect on the environment; and WHEREAS, the results of the Initial Study revealed that the proposed text amendment would not have a significant effect on the environment and the City therefore prepared a Negative Declaration in accordance with the requirements of Section 15070 of the CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council regarding zoning ordinances; and WHEREAS, public notice of this deletion and reservation of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code has been given, and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on October 16, 2007. NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission considered the proposed Negative Declaration and finds and determines that based upon the results of the Initial Study and all of the evidence in the record that the proposed deletion and reservation of AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE ~ { OF Y3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE20F3 - Chapter 17.06 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code will not have a significant effect on the environment. Moreover, the Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that the Negative Declaration is complete and acceptable and contains all of the information required by the California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Pub. Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.: "CEQA") and the CEQA Guidelines. The Negative Declaration was properly circulated for public review and comment in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15073 and 15105 and the Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the City as lead agency. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt the Negative Declaration. SECTION 2. In accordance with Government Code Section 65855, the Planning Commission sets forth the following reasons for its recommendation that the City Council approve the proposed deletion and reservation of Chapter 17.06 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code: 1. The proposed text amendment will not be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort, or the general welfare of the persons working or residing within the City. The deletion of Chapter 17.06 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code will not result in new rules or regulations and will not result in the removal of important existing rules or regulations. The City Council approved an M-3 zoning designation which created a specific zone related to mineral resource uses. The M-3 zoning designation addresses all of the issues that were addressed in Chapter 17.06. Chapter 17.61 renders Chapter 17.06 unnecessary and superfluous. 2. The proposed text amendment will not be injurious to property or improvements within the City as the proposed revision and modification is an overall beneficial enhancement to development in the City. The amendment clarifies inconsistencies in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. 3. The proposed text amendment is consistent with the General Plan, Community Design Element, and serves as an important link between the City's built and natural environments. SECTION 3. That Chapter 17.06 shall be deleted from the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code and shall be reserved for future use. SECTION 4. Based upon all of the evidence presented and the above findings, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore approve an ordinance deleting and reserving Chapter 17.06 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code and that the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore approve the Negative Declaration prepared therefor. SECTION 5. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1 P,iJ,GE__~_OF '1 3> PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE 3 OF 3 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of October 2007, by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Michael O'Neal, Chairman Lake Elsinore Planning Commission ATTEST: Rolfe M. Preisendanz Director of Community Development AGENDA1TE~~'- ~y PACE OF 3 INITIAL STUDY / NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2007-03 RUNNING DEER ANNEXATION PREPARED By: CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 130 SOUTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA 92530 AUGUST 2007 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7 PAGE ~ OF ~ ~ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Table of Contents I. INTRODUCfION 1 II. PROJECf DESCRIPTION 6 III. INITIAL STUDY / ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 11 IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 18 1. LAND USE PLANNING 18 2. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION 19 3. GEOLOGY 21 4. HYDROLOGY/WATER QUALITY 23 5. AIR QUALITY 24 6. NOISE 25 7. BIOLOGY 25 8. AESTHETICS 26 9. LIGHT AND GLARE 27 10.POPULATION AND HOUSING 27 11. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES 28 12. CULTURAL RESOURCES 29 13. PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES 29 14.MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 34 15. PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED 36 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1 REGIONAL AND VICINITY MAPS FIGURE 2 AERIAL PHOTO / PROJECf SITE 6 7 LIST OFTABLES TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND ZONING CHANGES 8 ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT A - NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT; NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY ATTACHMENT B - CEQA DISTRIBUTION LIST FOR PUBLIC REVIEW ~CENDAITEMNO. .... ...~ lPAGE . J. .. OF - . .:?> - Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Introduction I. Introduction A. Purpose This document is an Initial Study and Negative Declaration for evaluation of environmental impacts resulting from the annexation of approximately 589 acres, located within the City of Lake Elsinore Sphere of Influence. This annexation is a Condition of Approval required by the Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) in order to fully approve the Annexation 2005-81-1, Pacific Clay Annexation No. 72. In addition to analyzing the impacts of the annexation, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration also evaluate impacts resulting from minor revisions (i.e., amendments) to two (2) sections of the City of Lake Elsinore Zoning Code. For purposes of this document, this annexation and related text amendments as described in Section II Project Description will be called the "proposed project." B. California Environmental Quality Act Requirements As defined by Section 15063 of the State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, an Initial Study (IS) is prepared primarily to provide the Lead Agency with information to use as the basis for determining whether an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Supplemental EIR, Negative Declaration (ND), or Addendum would be appropriate for providing the necessary environmental documentation and clearance for any proposed project. This Initial Study has determined that the proposed annexation of the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a NEGATIVE DECLARATION (ND) has been prepared. This Initial Study and Negative Declaration have been prepared in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et. seq.); Section 15070 of the State Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15000, et. seq.); applicable requirements of the City of Lake Elsinore; and the regulations, requirements, and procedures of any other responsible public agency or an agency with jurisdiction by law. The City of Lake Elsinore is designated the Lead Agency, in accordance with Section 15050 of the CEQA Guidelines. The Lead Agency is the public agency, which has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project, which may have significant effects upon the environment. 1 AGENDA ITEM NO. PACE. ~ { OF V\ 3 Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Introduction C. Intended Uses of Initial Study and Negative Declaration This Initial Study and Negative Declaration are informational documents intended to inform City of Lake Elsinore decision-makers, other responsible or interested agencies, and the general public of potential environmental effects of the proposed project. The environmental review process has been established to enable public agencies to evaluate environmental consequences and to examine and implement methods of eliminating or reducing any potentially adverse impacts. While CEQA requires that consideration be given to avoiding environmental damage, the Lead Agency and other responsible public agencies must balance or override adverse environmental effects based upon other public objectives, including economic and social goals. As the Lead Agency, the City of Lake Elsinore has determined that environmental clearance for the proposed project can be provided with a Negative Declaration. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15205, the Initial Study and Draft Negative Declaration will be circulated for a period of 20 days for public and agency review. Comments received on the document will be considered by the Lead Agency before it acts on the proposed project. D. Contents of Initial Study This Initial Study is organized to facilitate a basic understanding of the existing setting and environmental implications of the as follows: I. INTRODUCTION presents an introduction to the entire report. This section identifies City of Lake Elsinore contact persons involved in the process, scope of environmental review, environmental procedures, and incorporation by reference documents. II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION describes the proposed project. A description of discretionary approvals and permits required for proposed project implementation is also included. III. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM contains the City's Environmental Checklist Form. The checklist form presents results of the environmental evaluation for the proposed project and those issue areas that would have either a significant impact, potentially significant impact, or no impact. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS evaluates each response provided in the environmental checklist form. Each response checked in the checklist form is discussed and supported with sufficient data and analysis. As appropriate, each response discussion describes and 2 AGENDA iTEM NO. I PAGE ~ OF l.f '? Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Introduction identifies specific impacts anticipated with proposed project implementation. In this section, mitigation measures are also recommended, as appropriate, to reduce adverse impacts to levels of "less than significant" where possible. Also included are the MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE in accordance with Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines. Further, PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED identifies those persons consulted and involved in preparation of this Initial Study. E. Scope of Environmental Analysis For evaluation of environmental impacts, each question from the Environmental Checklist Form is stated and responses are provided according to the analysis undertaken as part of the Initial Study. All responses will take into account the whole action involved, including off site as well as onsite, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. Project impacts and effects will be evaluated and quantified, when appropriate. To each question, there are four possible responses, including: 1. No Impact: A "No Impact" response is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to the proposed project. 2. Less Than Significant Impact: Development associated with project implementation will have the potential to impact the environment. These impacts, however, will be less than the levels of thresholds that are considered significant and no additional analysis is required. 3. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: This applies where incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact" The Lead Agency must describe the mitigation measures and explain how the measures reduce the effect to a less than significant level. 4. Potentially Significant Impact: Future implementation will have impacts that are considered significant and additional analysis and possibly an EIR are required to identify mitigation measures that could reduce these impacts to less than significant levels. F. Incorporation by Reference and Technical Studies Information, findings, and conclusions contained in this document are based on incorporation by reference of the City of Lake Elsinore General 3 ACEND.L\ ITEl',~ NO. PAGE I 0 OF f y~ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Introduction Plan and technical studies specific to the proposed project, which are discussed in the following section. Incorporation by Reference Incorporation by reference is a procedure for reducing the size of EIRs and/or Negative Declarations (ND) and is most appropriate for including long, descriptive, or technical materials that provide general background information, but do not contribute directly to the specific analysis of the proposed project itself. This procedure is particularly useful when an EIR or ND relies on a broadly-drafted EIR for its evaluation of cumulative impacts of related projects (Las Virgenes Homeowners Federation v. County of Los Angeles [1986, 177 Ca.3d 300]). If an EIR or ND relies on information from a supporting study that is available to the public, the EIR or ND cannot be deemed unsupported by evidence or analysis (San Francisco Ecology Center v. City and County of San Francisco [1975, 48 Ca.3d 584, 595]). This document incorporates by reference the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan (1995), the Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR (1991), and the Riverside County General Plan (2003). When an EIR or Negative Declaration incorporates a document by reference, the incorporation must comply with Section 15150 of the CEQA Guidelines as follows: · The incorporated documents must be available to the public or be a matter of public record (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150[a]). All incorporated documents are available, along with this document, at the City of Lake Elsinore, Community Development Department, 130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530, ph. (951) 674-3124, during normal business hours. · The incorporated documents must be available for inspection by the public at an office of the lead agency (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150[b]). Documents are available at the City of Lake Elsinore, Community Development Department, 130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530, ph. (951) 674-3124, during normal business hours. · This document must summarize the portion of the document(s) being incorporated by reference or briefly describe information that cannot be summarized. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150[c]). The Negative Declaration brings forth information from the City and County General Plans relates to existing and proposed land use and zoning designations, as applicable. · This document must include the State identification number of the incorporated document (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150[d]). The State Clearinghouse Number for the General Plan EIR is 91122065. 4 AGENDA ITCM NO. [ PAGE I r or- '13 Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Introduction · The material to be incorporated in this document will include general background information (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150[t]). 5 AGENDA ITEM NO. { PAGE~OF \.-{'3 Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Project Description II. Project Description A. Project Location and Setting The proposed annexation comprises of 589.28-acres located within the City of Lake Elsinore Sphere of Influence along the western border of the City of Lake Elsinore (Figure 1). The site is bordered by the conditionally approved Pacific Clay Annexation (LAFCO #2005-81-1) to the north, the Cleveland National Forest to the west, and the City of Lake Elsinore to the south and east, and is comprised of 37 parcels (Figure 2). These parcels are as follows: 389-290-001 389-290-014 389-290-023 389-290-029 391-790-007 391-790-012 391-800-004 391-800-009 389-290-002 389-290-017 389-290-025 391-250-003 391-790-008 391-790-013 391-800-005 391-800-010 389-290-009 389-290-019 389-290-026 391-790-001 391-790-009 391-800-001 391-800-006 389-290-010 389-290-020 389-290-027 391-790-005 391-790-010 391-800-002 391-800-007 389-290-013 389-290-022 389-290-028 391-790-006 391-790-011 391-800-003 391-800-008 The topography of the site is gentle sloping hills and plateaus on the eastern portion to rugged mountainous terrain on the western portion, with a valley between the two. There are several rural residential dwellings onsite (5-7) in combination with agricultural related buildings. 6 AGENDA ITEM NO. I PACE-1.LOF If 3 Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Project Description The site consists of mostly undisturbed land, although there are some portions of the site used as an illegal dump site for household and agricultural waste and construction debris. Figure 2 Project Bounda B. Project Purpose As mentioned above, Riverside LAFCO conditionally approved the Pacific Clay Annexation (City of Lake Elsinore Annexation No. 72, LAFCO Annexation 2005-81-1) on March 23, 2006 by Resolution 21-06. Specifically, the following is the condition of approval that calls for the annexation of the project site: "Prior to recordation of the Certificate of Completion, a complete application must be submitted for annexation to the City of the pocket area south of the subject proposal..."! The annexation will alleviate the "island effect" of Riverside County land that will be created once the Pacific Clay annexation is approved. Public services and utilities will be provided to this newly annexed area by the City of Lake Elsinore. ] Part 6, section (d) of Resolution 21-06 passed March 23, 2006 by Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission. 7 AGENDA iTEM NO. I PACE~Of: y 3 Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Project Description c. Project Description The proposed project annexation involves a change from existing County land uses and zoning to comparable City of Lake Elsinore land uses and zoning. Table 1 below provides the descriptions and acreages for each County and City land use and zone. The allowable densities under the City's land use designation and pre- zoning are equivalent or similar to the densities allowable under the County's existing land use and zoning. The purpose for this is to neither "de-value" the properties within the annexation area by lowering the allowable density, nor to bring forth a substantial increase in density as part of this annexation. However, as shown in Table 1, the change within 143 acres of the annexation area from the County's Rural Residential at one (1) dwelling unit (DU) per five (s) acres would allow 29 DU as compared to the City's Very Low Density at one (1) DU per two (2) acres which would allow 72 DU. This would result in a non-significant increase of 43 DU over the existing County conditions. This would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s89-acre proposed annexation. Further, no development application is included as part of the annexation. Any future development applications will be subject to environmental analysis as required pursuant to CEQA. Table 1 Existing and Proposed Land Uses and Zoning ( . 1 8 ) apprOXImatelY 5 sg acres Riverside County (acres) City of Lake Elsinore (acres) RM (410) Future SP (243) Existing Land Use RR (143) M (225) OS- MR (35) VLD (53) LM (67) Proposed Land Use NA Mt (410) VLD (143) after GPA is approved OS (35) R-A-lO (486) Existing Zoning R-A-2 1/2 (67) NA M-R (35) R-M-R (410) Proposed Pre-Zoning NA RR (143) OS (35) Note: To date, the County's current zoning designations have not been made consistent with their land uses approved in their General Plan Update. 8 AGENDA ITEM NO. I PAGE l f" OF 11 ~ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Project Description Existing County Land Use RM = Rural Mountainous; 1 DUjlO acres RR = Rural Residential; 1 DUj5 acres OS-MR = Open Space Mineral Residential; no DU; mineral extraction only Existing City Land Use Future SP = Future Specific Plan; This land use is being eliminated from the proposed General Plan Update, anticipated for approval in December 2007. M = Mountainous; 1 DU j10 acres VLD = Very Low Density; 1 DUj2 acres (i.e., 0.5 DUj1 acre) LM = Low Medium; 6 DUjacre County Zoning R-A-lO = Residential Agriculture 10; 1 DUj10 acres R-A-21/2 = Residential Agriculture 21/2; 1 DUj2.5 acres MR = Mineral Resources; No allowable residential development; Mineral extraction only City Proposed Land Use (after GPA approval) MT = Mountainous; 1 DUj10 acres VLD = Very Low Density; 1 DUj2 acres (Le., 0.5 DUj1 acre) OS = Open Space City Proposed Pre-Zoning R-M-R = Rural Mountainous Residential; 1 DUjlO acres RR = Rural Residential; 1 DUj2 acres OS = No residential development; Recreation District Overlay does allow for mining and quarrying As part of the proposed project, two (2) text amendments to the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code will also be necessary, and are described as follows: . Amend and restate Section 17.35.020 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code CLEM C) regarding residential uses in Open Space Districts. The purpose of this text amendment is to delete Section 17.35.020CA)(4) from the LEMC because it is inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the Open Space District and because the Rural-Mountainous-Residential zone already provides opportunity for landowners to develop their property at one dwelling unit per ten acres. This revision will ensure the protection of the health, safety, comfort and general welfare of persons working and/ or residing in Lake Elsinore by prohibiting residential uses in areas where human habitation is dangerous. . Delete and reserve Chapter 17.06 of the LEMC regarding the Resource Conservation Overlay District. The recently added Chapter 17.61 to the LEMC establishing the M-3 Mineral Resources and Related Manufacturing District 9 AGENDA ITEM NO. I PACE~OI: '1 '3 Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Project Description rendered the terms of the existing Chapter 17.06 superfluous and unnecessary. Chapter 17.61 more thoroughly outlines the application process and the regulations regarding treatment and extraction of natural resources within City limits. The purpose of this text amendment is to clarify inconsistencies in the LEMC. Other entitlements required as part of the proposed project include a General Plan Amendment (GPA) and PreZone. D. Analysis Under CEQA While the annexation of these parcels lays the foundation for future development, no development plans are included with the annexation, text amendments, GP A, or Prezone. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s8g-acre proposed annexation. Any further evaluation of impacts of the annexation would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that all applicable studies, i.e. biological, geotechnical, air quality, hydrology, and others be included as part of the environmental assessment process. Any impacts and mitigation related to environmental impacts would be identified and mitigated as required by CEQA. For all future development proposals the City would invite review and comments by the Regulatory Agencies and the public, including landowners within and around the annexation boundary. In addition, two (2) text amendments are being proposed for the purposes of clarifying and making consistent two ordinances in the LEMC. These text amendments will only be evaluated in the checklist below where applicable. E. Public Outreach The City held a public outreach meeting on June 28, 2007 for the purposes of informing those within and adjacent to the proposed project area that an annexation is being processed. No issues related to potential environmental impacts were raised at this meeting. 10 AGENDA iTEf'iJ NO. -, PACE II OF l.t ':? Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Checklist Form III. Initial Study / Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: Running Deer Annexation 2. Lead Agency Name, Address, and Phone Number: City of Lake Elsinore Planning Department 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore CA 92530 (951) 674-3124 3. Contact Person and Title: Wendy Worthey, Principal Environmental Planner 4. Project Location: The proposed annexation includes the land north of the existing boundary of the City of Lake Elsinore, south of Annexation No. 72 (Pacific Clay Annexation), east of Cleveland National Forest, and west of Lake Street located in unincorporated Riverside County. 5. Project Sponsor Name(s) and Address(es): City of Lake Elsinore Planning Department 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 (951) 674-3124 6. Existing General Plan Designation: Refer to Table 1 above in Section II.C. Project Description 7. Zoning: Refer to Table 1 above in Section II.C. Project Description 8. Project Description: Refer to Section II Project Description above. 11 AGENDA iTEI'\;l NO. PACE \ 8 --, OF L( '3 Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Checklist Form 9. Surrounding Land Uses The Pacific Clay Company has active mineral (clay and gravel) extraction, rock crushing, and brick and pottery fabrication off site to the north of the proposed annexation. To the west is the Cleveland National Forest, which consists of rugged open space. To the south is a mixture of developed residential and open space within the City of Lake Elsinore. To the east is Lake Street and residential development. 10. Other Required Approvals and Involved Agencies: Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission 11. Incorporation by Reference: As permitted in Section 15150 of the CEQA Guidelines, environmental documents can incorporate by reference all or portions of other documents that are a matter of public record. The information presented in this document is based upon other environmental documents. Information and data from the following documents are incorporated by reference: General Plan EIR; City of Lake Elsinore, 1991 This document is available for review at the Lake Elsinore City Hall; 130 South Main Street: Lake Elsinore, California 92530; Phone: (951) 674- 3124. 12. Potentially Significant Impacts: D Land Use and Planning D Transportationj Circulation D Geology D Hydrology D Air Quality D Noise D Biology D Aesthetics D Light and Glare D Energy jMineral Resources D Cultural Resources D Public ServicesjUtilities 12 AGENDA iTEM NO. I PACE l cr OF y.~ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Checklist Form 13. Determination: ~ D D 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 shall be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will NOT be significant effects in this case because proposed mitigation measures reduce effects to insignificant levels. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION shall be prepared. I find that the proposed project COULD have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT shall be prepared. September 4, 2007 Wendy Worthey, Principal Environmental Planner Name and Title Date 13 f Lt'"?> AGENDA ITEi.i NO. PACE .;} 0 Or- t co; !:l. 8 ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '"'" 0 Z e - ;~t 0 ~ .... '" ..s::~co; ~ ~$ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ OJ ~ ~ ~'"'" -= u ~Ci5 -; .... = ~ -= e = co; = 0 ~ 0 - 1+::..... "tl .;: ..... +'" ~ = ~co;+", ~ b.Oco; ......,tl ~ r:n..... 0 b~ e ';~o .,tl ~ ~ =.!!= ='"'" ~~ 0 =-.c ;>'+'" :;;t .,tl ~ co; =$ ~ ~ ~'"'" 0..... =-.cr:n = .51 .... = - = ~ = ~ oQ ~ ~ = ~ i>< .- ~.... = = = I)t) <~ --- ~ .... ~'C Q = I)t).... ern '2 'i =~ = .- ~.s ~ ..... = ; - =-.c ~ ~ ~ "tl ; ~ ..; 00 bO .~ ",. .S .~ 1:) t) - <l.l ",. '>< ~ 8:5' ~ <l.l .S ~ ~ g5 ~ p 8 00 1:l ",. "C "S 'r::o N~""'~~""""'~ I-< _ I-< 00 _ ~ ~..... oPl~::l~o<l.lS - -.... S ~ '" o=.~'p I-< .S 1:: 8 '" 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ <l.l..... ~..o. 9< ~ <l.l .~ ~ .~ .~ 3 (5 t ~ ..... 0 "C ~ <l.l I-< '" U ~ I-<.~ 0 ~ 0 _ ~ ~ .~ .g gf gf ~ .~ .~ '" <l.l...s:::......p I-< ~ 0 - <l.l..... ..... 00 ::l ....- p., _ 'r:: .:a..... o...s::: '" _..o.:;><~ooPlbO '" '" 00 <l.l <l.l <l.l ~ I-<.~ <l.l...s:::...s::: I-<...s:::..... Q) ...... -I""""l ~ +J ...... ...... ""tj ,~ g: g .~.~ ~ ~ .E '-' '" ~ <l.l <l.l ......;:: g ...s:::...s::: "'::0::0 ~ ..... ..... ..... ..... ~.......... U "C ~ '?>- '~'~..o. ~ ~'8 ~ ..e.-!::: t) t)"C !::'s !::'s c;;..... ~ ~ ..... ..... .I!:l ..... PI::l ::l '+l '+l "'. 0 0 U =' S S ~~OUU~<l.l~SS o 0 "C <l.l <l.l ..... UU"'~~ 088 ~ ,.ci c.i..o a.i...... ~ ",. '" c.i 'r:: ",. tl ..... 00 ~ ~ <l.l ~~ "C ~ ..6 U ~ ..8 ~~ bO ~ ~"'. ~..9:l ~ <l.l ..... U :.a ~ 'CJ ~ ~ ::l 0 '" bO..... 'B ..... e ~..o. ",. ~ 00 "'..... oo~ ",. ~ ..... ~ u t ..... .e3 .g~~ ~g&~~ = 001-< "';.E;lPl.....!::' o ~'.s"'.I-<I-<::l~S .,tl is' '" 00 0 '" 00 ..... ..... co; S:<$"Eooi:5.~oou -= ~ ~ '" ~ .I!:l'CJ ::l lE ... I-< bO N u............o. '" ~ 0..... '" U.E3"O ~ I-< .=: .9 ~...s::: ~ b PI.S ~ U ..... "C I-< U "C "C 'C;; .fjs~~~.I!:l.E1-< <l.l I-< ~ <l.l ,..., U 0 - 0 <l.l ~..... ...... ~ .~ ";::'r:: ~.(jj,g..... <l.l~ ...s::: 00 I-< S ~ '" ~~ E ~"E~<l.lO...s:::oo -- ..... .............c ~ "'..... <l.l ~'r:: ~ I-< ..... ~.:a ~ <l.l :; ..... <l.l <l.l....- ......... 1-<..... OO-~g~t)o'" ~PU<l.lf:E;;s~~ tl$;B'g f;l ~ ~r;:f ~ '" I-< ~ ~ 0 ~ C>l ......rno............u.....~ ~ ,.ci c.i..o a.i ...... - = o .,tl co; t o !:l. ~ ; ~ ~ oo~ ~tS ~ I-< '" 0 -8~ E'S PI'g r:l 51: bO ~ o ~ bO Plo .S ",. .s'p ~ 00 bO~ '" ~ ~ '" ~ .s :e~ "C '" ::l <l.l ~ ~ ] S g ~ .~ 0 I-< .~ ",. 00-<1:: bO ~oot)oo ~ .f:' ~ '" ~ 's ""ii 0 PI.s 00 I-<'+l s.~ 'Q) ",. 0 ~ ..... "C "'. 00 . U .... 00 ~ 00 - .B ':;:" S r::= 0 ..... 00<l.l~ ouU ~ -..9 ~ 00 <l.l e .s8200~::Os PI'p 5(: <l.l U .s ..... =' U <l.l ~ ..... 00 ~ 1-<"'::l_bO~O ~ "tj .g- ~..9 ::l..... ::l ::l..... ~ 0 "C ~ "'.g- ~ '" <l.l ~ I-< ~;..:::O~0"'~ ~ ,..ci c.i..o a.i a.i' U ~ <l.l "C ..... 00 ..0. ::l 00 a.i' ..s:::: U ..... <l.l 00 ~ o - o ~ ~ M ~ ..... 'il = 01 ~ Q,) ~ ~ o - o ~ ~ ~ <l.l "C~ ~ I-< '" <l.l '+:l...s::: I-<<l.l..... <l.l ~ I-< ~ I-< 0 ~ 0 00 "S ~f E ~.I!:l.l!:l o '" ..... '.0 ~ ~ U...s::: <l.l ~OObO ..... <l.l '" "C <I:: ~ ~ I-< 'C;; o I-<....~ <l.l<l.l"Cq:: ~ ~ - 0 ::l'r:: ~ ~ 8 "'s ~ 8 I-< I-< <l.l o I-< ~ U _ <l.l 0 '" .e3 ..s:::: '.0 't ~.~ c..::l <l.l <l.l 1-<'00 I-<~04-< 1-<..... JS 0 =' - '" ..... U 00 ~ ~..... ~ ::l ..... 5..... 0 ~ s ~ s ~ <l.l ~ '" ~6S~'g u u", ~ ,.ci AGENDA ITEM NO. PACE a-' '<t' - "'. 00 ~ I-< <l.l ~ a "C o o '+l 4-< o ~ o '+l "C ~ '" <l.l 00 I-< ::l o U o ..... 00 ~ .s ..... '" I-< <l.l ..... ~ c.i OF -, Gt3 e '- o r.. - '" :fJ C,l ~ .c U -; - = ~ e = o '- .;: = ~ = .9 - tIS '- tIS c:i = ~ .9 Q -; ~ ~ .- ~~ = ~ <z '--... ~ .... ~~ Q = gfv:i .= -; c;; = .- i:l:.5 .... [;[;t ,.Q~= E"q~ '" ~.... S ~ Q~ ...:lCi.i .... [; = ~ 0 I+:: .... 'tl .... ~ ~ Qb.()~ .....,tl ~ r:IJ.... 0 b~ is. -;~g .,tl ~ ~ =i~ ~~ o ~ >>.... ~[;t .,tl ~ = =$ ~ ~ Q~ 0.... ~r:IJ t = ~ ~ o Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,-., 'tl ~ := = .,tl = o ~ "-' ,e. .... -; := 01 ~ ~ ~ ~ o - o i == ~ () ...... .s Q)~ 8 1$ ;g o ~Q)~.....23.......t) ~ ~ ..0 ....... '- Q)U ~()::3 o ell '- '- ~ 0 Q) ~= rJ:J~() =~ ~ ~ = .J::: ...... ell '- ......>> 0 ell ~ oS"'" 0.J::: = ~"C~ ~8- ~ .J::: ~ ...... 0 ~ Q) Q) ell .J::: - ell ell ..e ~"C'-o~..... ~~'- ~~~ ~ 1$ ~ '- ~ 0 ~ o.s ::3 ~ !"::I .J::: _..... = ..... .... Q)...... ~ ~.... C'- 't:l 0...... ~ "" ell ell ..... S .0 ~ 0 d en = ,-::3 .s ~ g . ~ a:l = 'Cd ......;.::: Q) ~ ~ = ::3.J::: sr ........ .r '- ...... - ...... S Q) 0 0 .....'~ blJ '+J bb Q) '- '- 6' '5 ;.s ...... ~ ~.+:I 6:l: ~ = ::3 ~ ell .~rJ:J Q) ~ ell = '-"C..... ell eIl........J::: ell 00 ~ ~ =~B~~~~o~~ ,-=8 Q) ~ i> .......... '- ~ "C '=" Q) Q) .J::: = .J::: Q) ,-..0 0 ~'t:l = 0..... = ..... i-< 'Cd~ ..... 0 () 0 ~ .....S = ~ ~ i:! ,i:S.sa .0 '-'1:: 0 .....E~Q)~. .s ~ = .... 't:l.... = ........... ...... Q) ..... '- ~, '- ~;.::: Q) ::3 ""~ S...... ~ 'Cd f,< -..... rJ:J Q) = ~~~CJrJ:Jo.So=C) gl~::3 ..... Q)~ rJ:J eIl-><:==~SG:lo,,'- 0" "C ~ ~eIl ~ ~ g 0 ......~,.g rJ:J '- '- ~ '- S.S .;: 8 ~ ..... Q) ...... "C rJ:J '- Q) S 0 ~ = Q) '- ~ 0 ~'Cd = (),i:S~~~~88e1l~ j~~ = 8~ 5 ~ ...... '0 .s 0.;:: ~.+:I ~ ~ '- -€ .sa Q) -::: o ::3CdrJ:J::3~~~()"C::3 ~0::3 t) ~o ~ rJ:J::3 rJ:J - >> Q)...... ~ = 0 ::: ~ 0 .E ~..... ::.; ell 0 o";.s 'O.J::: ~~;e ::3 ~ .... - ~ ...... _:: ~ ~ ~ as ~ =~'t:l ~....... 8 ..... C'-. 8 ~ 8 ~ ~ ~;e ..... C'-. ...... ..... '- ~ 0 ~ 't:l 0 ~ 8 rJ:J ~ ~ ....... _ Q) ~ 0 = "C Q) ell ::3 ..... ...... = = = = "C rJ:J C'- ell...... 0 ...... = ~ ~ ..... ell t) rJ:J = 0...... rJ:J 0...... Q) ..... en'+:I"O Q).:;::: Q) ~ ~ Q) i:! ~ 8 ~ eIl.+:I Q) 8.+:1 Q) S ~.~ = e ~ rJ:J ~ ~.J::: ~ g. S ~.~ ~ i:! ~:-e ~ ~'a "S.~ ~ ~ ~ ell ~ ~ .~ '"g S .s 8 "S ~ ~ ~;g ~ ~ ] ~ .-8 .g ~ ~13 uoQrJ:J~rJ:J()=~~UellQ)u'-~eIl~~~~ ..0 Q) 4-< biJ..d .,...; ~ ...... ~ ~ ~~~ -I-- -- -I-- -I-- ,e. .... -; := 01 ~ < ~ C'-. = Q) ...... ..... ~ ell .>< S OJ ~ = '- ell 0 S Q)~ Q) '- ..... C'-.::3 ::3 23~ ~ = ~ C'-. ..... .s e. rJ:J =::30 a:l o C'-.;:::::: ~ ~ ()=0Q) Q) '-0i5...... - 0'+:1 0 ~~ ~ "C ~ ..... = C'-. .0..... '- 0 rJ:J ..... ~ .g.> 8.~ 0 = ~~eo'"8 ~ ......~Q)SQ) C'-.~ rJ:J'Cd () .....~_ ~ Q) .oe~=~ ~rJ:J ;.:::.....Q)Q)= Q)O gl .!::.~ ~.sa ~ ~ 0" eIl.~ ~..... .~ ~ "CrJ:Joa:l 00' 6' ~ 5 S'~ ~ ~ eIl()rJ:J,-o _- Q).~ Q)...... ~ rJ:J Q) .....orJ:JeIl~~eIlrJ:J ,$ ~ 52 '- ell.... ~ 52 .sa : ~ ~ ~ ZO g >< >O~<tjU .....~ ell ,.ci<:.i..o~eIl,.ci ~~ ~ ~ V') - ~ o - o .... ~ r.:. C'-. ....... ~ o ...... ..... 23 .S .s ::3 ;.c S ell S .J::: 0 ~ () ;g ] .E C'-: B () () ell .s ~ = ~oo'- ~"C 0 ...... '- rJ:J a:l ;.c .~ ~ rJ:J~ a:l Q)'Cd ~ '- S rJ:J i:!...... 15 = ~ ~ ~oo~ ~ t) .Fjj '- Q) Q) <5~"C '-...... >> o ...= ,-.J::: ell Q) rJ:J () ~l+=l~.Q = rJ:J ..... ell ..... () "C=~ ~-a< ell ,.ci .n AGENDA ITEM NO. PACE d- J- OF ---, Y3 e - o ~ - '" ~ y ~ ..= U "; - e ~ e e o - .;; e ~ e .9 - ~ - ~ ~ e ~ oQ :c Q.} ~ > ~ .- ~- e ~ e 1)1) <z --- ~ >. ~'O Q = 1)1)- ern '= "; =;: = .- c::.s ;~t E:l~= III $ ~ ~ ~>-4 ...:lri5 ..... ; = ~ Q q:: ... '0 ... ..... ~ ==..... bbbb= ....,1:2 ,.. rI:J... Q ,.Q::S C. ';1Il~ .,1:2 III ~ .. ~ = ...=>-4 ~~ Q ~ ......... :;;t .,1:2 ~ = =$ ~ ~ ~>-4 Q... ~rI:J ..... ~ = ~ >-4 Q Z - "l:l ~ = = .,1:2 = Q ~ '-' ~ Q - Q ... =:l r.:. ~ ~ '0 = ctl ';:l ~ '+-< o = o ... ..... ~ ::l '0 Q) I-< ~ = ... '"'0 ::l - ~ I-< = 0 ~ ~ ..... 00 .s I-< ~ ~ ..Q :.e '0 ~ = ... ,$ ;:a ~C\-.~ ~ Q) ~ t)~t) ~~~ c.i ..0 C\-. ~ o '"'0 '6 o ~ = o ... ..... ctl I-< .~ S ~~ 1--1-- -I-- -- -- III ~ .,1:2 ~ ii III ~ QO ~ ctl .E ~c;.; ..Q ~ .~~ = Q) ~.~ 00..... 1-1 Q) 0{3 .s ~ ~ 00 ctl ,.. .;; Q) = ,~'.6 S ~ ~ "l:l ~ Q) = 00 = = ctl ctl t) Q) ~~ ~..c - - - - ..... fo ~ ~ ... (IJ = c\-. Q Q) :t ~ "l:l ~ ; = = ctl Q ..... .,1:2 ..s. = ;.; -= Q) l:l. ~ Q ~ ~ U ~ S ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ '1:: o ..... 00 :E 1-1 o ......:- ctl C\-. ~ 00 ... Q) gjl .E C\-. - ctlCll o > Q) 15 ~g5 ~ I-< '0 ~ ::l Q) ~ ~ Ci3 ::l(il .~ ~ 00 ~ ... I-< 0=0 '0 ...= 00 -= ~ g 2 ~:g ca C\-. .E" Q) p. 00 = I-< ..c~::ltl 1-1 1-1 ..... ... ::l ::l ~ .tJ tiO~Q)CIl -1""""4 en Q) o~ .:z::: ~ ..c c.i ~~~ III ~ .,1:2 ... - .,1:2 ~ "l:l ; (IJ ~ ~ .E ~ rI:J ~ ... - ~ ~ M 1"'4 C\-. C\-.5 =... 0..... ',p a:5 ~..... Q) 0 '0 S. ~ ~Q)- ...... ~ 0 Q)'" 0 .!:: '0-5 ~p..C/) ~,.O c.i 1.0 - I \.t3 AGENDA liEVl NO. PI\CE ;} '3 OF Q'I ~ = ~ -= C\-. .8 .S .S:l..... 00 ~ 00 ~ ctl '0 '3 g 1E.s ~ g. I-< ~ ~ .S ~ ~ ; ~ ~ -a~ ~ .s ~ ~ 'E =- 0 Ci3 ..9 Q) 0 0<E ~ Q) I-< ~ ~ ',p 1l I-< ~ ~ ctl (IJ ~ ~ ~ ctl ctl 1il.Q~Q)~ ~'.g .~ ~ '; ~ 00 ctl .S 1l ~ = 'c) ::I 5 = S ~ Q) ctl e. Q ~.;;; .... .:: .S ~ ~ >, Q) ~ S ctl.. ..J ~~ 0 ~ '0 - ~;; ~ Q)::l IE ~ .S '; =Q) 000 ~ ~ Q) O 0 . '+-< ::l;::;' ~ I-< 00 ... '"'0 Q) 0 "= =-0 ~ '"'0 ~ ::l ~ Q) 1-1 "" ,.. ~ ~ .8.S e. ..S:l .~ ~ S. ::I ~ ... ~~ ~ o..g :;::: I-< I-< Q >:: ..... =- ~ '"'O'~ ..c::l 0 (IJ ~ ~ ',p '0 ctl~ ctl.:EQ) ~ -Q) C\-. ti .;a S ..Q..... ~ ~ e. ~ ..c >:: >I, Q) >'+-<0 ~ .~ ~ ::l ~ Q) >.'~ 1-1 ctl 0 Q) ~ ~.8 00 05 Q) bb ..... = C\-. Q) Q) ~ !:l _.....Q)~~ ,.. ~0~..Q..cQ) t: ;;a:5g~~ ~ tE==.....'O~-=l ~ '5' '0;'::: Cii = = Q) = Q) '3 e ;;l ::l I-< =. ~... ~ 0 ~ ctl ~ 0 >:: U u a.......::: 0 ~ u,..., S ....:l ~ ~ N ~ ..c c.i 1"'4 ~,.O c.i ..0 1"'4 E '- o ~ .... '" ~ (j ~ -= U -; .... = ~ E = o '- .;: = ~ = .:= .... ~ '- = y ~Q :;: a.,) ~ .=: ~= = 0.lI -<z '-...... ~ >-. ~'C ~ = :00 .= -; =; = .- ~.s t ~ l:l. e ~ c Z ... ;;t E5~~ rIJ.... e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3~~ ... = ~ = CJ C '-= .+:: "tI '8 ~ ~ b.() bt) ~ .....+:: ~ c:t.l.... c ~~ Q. ';rIJ~ .+:: rIJ CJ .....!l = ...=~ ~::J c ~ ;>.... =;;t .+:: CJ ~ =$ ~ ~ Q~ c.... ~c:t.l ,-.. "tI ~ = = .+:: = c CJ - rIJ ~ .+:: .... - .+:: p "tI ; rIJ ~ CJ 'E ~ c:t.l CJ .... - ~ l-< Q) ..d ~ ~ ~ o 0 t:: 'g '.g B ctl ..0 tI.l <I:l ..... "'C ~ tl ~ 8.. :.a tI.l l-< ~ 'g <oS Q) 0 tI.l 8 ~ 'g 1il ~ ~ ctl ~ 8:.a 8 ~ ~ = Q) "C ~ c:l "C ~ 8.S "C ctl.f' ~ .g;; ~ ~ ~. g. g'E g tI.l tI.l l-< Q) ..... S l-< Q) tI.l ~ bO~' Q) 1l ~. 1il ~. .~ _ ~tI.l ~ctl J,l>-- ctl :.a .25 ;; ~ ~.. iJl..o ~ =;..::::: tI.l_ ctlSos. Q) - ..... ~ ctl ~ l-< e. d <:.)<:.) o~ <:.)Otl.l4-<~.1=4 ~ ..;s ..... 0 ..... ~;.::: 0 tI.l ~ -1"""'4 ojooooI ....-( 1:: en -....." CI) CI) ~ ~ ca C'-. ctl bO ~ l-< Q) <:.)..... Q) g ~ ~.~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ 6 ..... 0 @: ~ l-<~' l-< Q) ctl ctl.cJ bi: 1il'.>:l~ca 8 0 ~ 0 ~~~..;s l-< ~1ilQ)l-<l=4cal=4l-<~"C~ Q) <:.) l-< ~ = 8 <:.) 1l ~.....;..:::::.S.S {3 ~ 1rl 0 1il r~ q ;; Q) ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 .....l-<D...z......--tI.lU)C!U),.."."'C . .-d Q)...... bi:..d ....: ....;,.:.:1 .....; S M ~ ~ ~ ~ C'-. tI.l Q) <:.) 'E C'-. ~ tI.l ctl.;:l sea 'O..do.... ~~ p~ ~ 1l ~ +:: _ ~ ..... '0 g ~ ~ l-< t .is g ca .......... l-< 0 ~ 0 ~..o ..d tI.l = 1il 1il S 0 ca ..... ..d Q) ca .~ t) 0".~"3;"::::: ~ 8 tI.l tI.l S = ";:..,8 ~ ~ Q, Q) ..0 .;:: "g Q) ~ "C .. ~ ctl..d 0 B S ctl.t:: 6:i 8 :~ J!j Q) ~ Q) Q, ~ = l-< Q) ..... .~ ..s <:.) t) Q)..d~Q)~0Q, -5~~ ..,8Q) "'C ~ ..... ~ Q) ~ l-< ctl Q) ..... C'-. 'tJ .~ 0Q);:a1il...c~0 0~~~_'E ~ g ~ l-< ~ .$ '(? ~ t:: ctl..o ctl.::: ca"'C;s;-:S8Q,S caQ)~~~l-< ..... Q) l-< ~ = "C 4-< '.>:l"'i' ctl Q) Q) 0 ~ l-< 0 ~ "C Q) 0 .C'-~. ~ ~ -:S "C 8 ~ Q) ;>'..d Q) Q) ~ tI.l Q) ~ tI.l'c;J .... 1rl ~::::l tI.l :> l-< bO Q) 0 ~o 0 ~ ~ 0.... l-< o ctl ~ Q) ~.... - ~ - <:.) 0 ..... Q,..... - p .... Q, tI.l Q,4-< ctl <:.) .~ "'C Q) ~ ctl bO..... ~ s:.a Q) 0 Q, ~ ;;> Q) ..d ctl Q).S ~ ~ ctl Q)..d ~ s,.!:; ~ tI.l ~ ~ tI.l ~ = Q) >< l-< ~ ~..... Q) Q) l-< ~.2 ~'a s l-< Q) a ~ .is Q).~ ~ ~ ctl = <:.) ~ s 0 ~ tl ctl ~ ~ 1il ctl"C ..d tI.l~ ui = 0 Q) ctl >-..d :> ..d "3 ..d ctl t) ~ .~ ~..:: ~ ~o 5 t) 'g t) 8 t) ] Q)Q) _ctl ~Q)tI.lQ)=Q)~ '0' 8 & ~ 8 ctl Q,.~ 'O':.a '0' <:.) '0' ~ .... ~ tI.l >..... '0 S..d l-< l-< ~ l-< ~ Q, 0 Q) .. ~ ..... ctl Q, Q) Q, = Q, tI.l Q) l-<:t::.sa ctl ~ 1l..... Q) -:S Q)..o Q).g -:S .~ ~ ~ tl ~ ~ E:.s B -:S "'C~.s tI.l ~ g] Q) ~ g. ~ ~'S S g] $3 g].~ g] ~ g o Q) l-< l-< ctl Q)..... ca 0 ctl 0 S 0 ctl Q) ~ ~ -:S 0 "'C '"a{3 ~ u ~ ~ ~ ;..::::: ~ <:.) 0- ~ ctl ..0 <:.) "'C Q.l CJ ; CJ '-= .~ .... c:t.l l+-o C rIJ ~ ;a = .... ~ ~ c ~ "tI ; ~ ~ r--- - ACENDA ITEM NO. PACE~OF -, \.{'3 Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis F. Environmental Analysis 1. Land Use Planning a. Conflict with General Plan or Zoning Less than Significant - The City of Lake Elsinore (City) is currently performing a General Plan Update. Annexation of these parcels does not impact the existing General Plan or draft General Plan Update, as the properties in the annexation are within the Sphere of Influence and included in the General Plan and draft General Plan Update. The parcels must be pre- zoned by City Council, and an annexation application must be submitted to Riverside LAFCO as a condition of the Pacific Clay annexation. See Section II. C. Project Description for details regarding existing and proposed land uses and zoning, and LEMC text amendments. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s89-acre proposed annexation. Should any development be proposed in the future, the City would require consistency with the General Plan land use and zoning designations at that time. Impacts are considered less than significant. b. Conflicts with Environmental Plans or Policies No Impacts - The City participates in the Riverside County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) through use of the LEAP (Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process). The annexation action does not authorize the disturbance of land and therefore would not impact any covered species or habitat. Future development will be reviewed for specific impacts on the land and will require completion of biological studies. No impacts to any established environmental plans or policies are anticipated due to the annexation or LEMC text amendments. The area proposed for annexation does lie within MSHCP Criteria Cells and all future development would be required to undergo a joint project review with the Regional Conservation Authority. c. Compatibility with Onsite Land Uses Less Than Significant - There is no development plan at this time included as part of the proposed annexation. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be expected to impact onsite land uses when considering its minor contribution to the entire s89-acre proposed annexation. The City would require that any future development plans be consistent with existing land uses and zoning at that time. Further, approval of the two (2) proposed text amendments would result in minor revisions to ordinances in the LEMC thus ensuring compatibility with onsite land uses. Less than significant impacts would be expected. 18 ACENDA ITEM NO. ( PfJ,CE ?-S OF Y J Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis d. Compatibility with Neighborhood Land Uses Less than Significant - The Pacific Clay Company has active mineral (clay and gravel) extraction, rock crushing, and brick and pottery fabrication offsite to the north of the proposed annexation. To the west is the Cleveland National Forest, which consists of rugged open space. To the south is a mixture of developed residential and open space within the City of Lake Elsinore. To the east is Lake Street and residential development. There is no development plan at this time included as part of the proposed annexation. The increase in 43 D U resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be expected to impact neighboring land uses when considering its minor contribution to the entire s8g-acre proposed annexation. The City would require that any future development plans be consistent with neighboring land uses and zoning at that time. Further, approval of the two (2) proposed text amendments would result in minor revisions to ordinances in the LEMC thus ensuring compatibility with neighbohood land uses. Impacts would be considered less than significant. e. Affect Agriculture No Impacts - There are no designated agricultural uses within any of the parcels proposed for annexation nor are there any agricultural overlays covering these parcels. No impacts to agricultural land would be expected. f. Disrupt Established Community Less than Significant - The area consists of scattered residences in a rural setting, including areas of open space. There is no development plan at this time included as part of the proposed annexation. Neither the proposed annexation nor approval of the text amendments would disrupt an established community. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be expected to disrupt the rural communities in the area considering its minor contribution to the entire s8g-acre proposed annexation. The City would require that any future development plans be consistent with neighboring land uses and zoning at that time. The residences within and adjacent to the proposed annexation were invited to attend a public outreach meeting held June 28, 2007. Further, they will be invited to comment on this document, as well as any CEQA documents required as part of future development projects. Impacts would be considered less than significant. 2. Transportation / Circulation a. Increase Trips or Congestion Less Than Significant - While the existing County land uses and 19 AGEfJDP\ rrE~'JllJO. PAGE a '" _OF I \.'1":3 _ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis zoning are comparable to the City's land use and zoning proposed as part of this annexation, the change from the County's RR designation to the City's VLD designation would result in an increase of 43 D U over existing conditions. The increase in 43 D U resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not result in a substantial increase in population when considering its minor contribution to the entire sSg-acre proposed annexation. Therefore, approval of the annexation would not result in a substantial increase in traffic trips or congestion, nor would it affect the existing Levels of Service in the area. There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require a traffic impact analysis as part of the environmental assessment process, and any impacts and mitigation related to traffic would be identified as required per CEQA. Traffic impacts resulting from the project as proposed would be considered less than significant. b. Safety Hazards No Impacts - There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require a traffic impact analysis, including an evaluation of safety hazards, as part of the environmental assessment process. Any impacts and mitigation related to traffic safety hazards would be identified as required per CEQA. There are no anticipated traffic safety hazards resulting from the project as proposed. c. Access No Impacts - There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require a traffic impact analysis, including an evaluation of access as part of the environmental assessment process. Any impacts and mitigation related to access would be identified as required per CEQA. There are no anticipated traffic access issues resulting from the projects as proposed. d. Parking No Impacts - There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require a traffic impact analysis, including an evaluation of adequate parking as part of the environmental assessment process. Any impacts and mitigation related to parking would be identified as required per CEQA and City ordinances. There are no anticipated parking issues resulting 20 AGEND,f\ lYEM NO. , PAGE :> f OF \.1 3 Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis from the project as proposed. e. Conflict with Alternative Transportation Policies No Impacts - There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. However, the changes in allowable densities resulting from the changes from County to City land uses would result in an additional 43 DU. The increase in 43 DU would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s89-acre proposed annexation. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require a traffic impact analysis, including an assurance that there would be no conflict with alternative transportation policies. Any mitigation necessary to ensure that there would be no conflicts would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated conflicts resulting from the project as proposed. f. Rail, Waterborne, or Air Traffic Impacts No Impacts - There are no rail, waterborne, or air traffic facilities within or in the vicinity of the parcels proposed for annexation. Therefore, these issue areas are outside the scope of this project. No impacts are expected. 3. Geology a. Seismic Hazards No Impacts - The City and surrounding areas are occasionally subject to seismic ground-shaking. There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that a geotechnical and faults study be included as part of the environmental assessment process. Further, any additional DUs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and design requirements as any other proposed development. Any impacts and mitigation related to seismic hazards would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated seismic issues resulting from the project as proposed. b. Unique Geologic Features No Impacts - The proposed project site does not appear to encompass any unique geologic features. Further, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that a geotechnical study be included as part of 21 AGEND,i\ rrC;,1 i'~O. --, PAGE '0 e OFY'?;, Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis the environmental assessment process. Any impacts and mitigation related to unique geologic features would be identified as required per CEQA. There are no anticipated issues resulting from the project as proposed. c. Landslides or Mudflows No Impacts - With any project located within a site encompassing hills or mountainous areas, there is a potential for landslides or mudflows. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that a geotechnical study be included as part of the environmental assessment process. Further, any additional DUs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and design requirements as any other proposed development. Any impacts and mitigation related to landslides or mudflows would be identified as required per CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to landslides or mudflows resulting from the project as proposed. d. Geologic or Soils Impacts No Impacts - There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any evaluation of soils impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that a geotechnical and soils study be included as part of the environmental assessment process. Further, any additional DUs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and design requirements as any other proposed development. Any impacts and mitigation related to seismic hazards would be identified as required per CEQA. There are no anticipated soils impacts resulting from the project as proposed. e. Erosion Impacts No Impacts - There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any evaluation of erosion impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that a geotechnical study be included as part of the environmental assessment process. In addition, the future development project would require compliance with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulations, including use of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce or avoid the potential for erosion. Further, any additional DUs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and requirements as any other proposed development. There are no anticipated erosion impacts resulting from the project as proposed. 22 AGENDA ITEM NO. , PAGE d Cf Or- 'i '3 Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis 4. Hydrology/Water Quality a. Drainage Changes No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for changes in drainage patterns and other hydrologic features. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that a hydrology study and drainage plan be included as part of the environmental assessment process. Further, any additional DDs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and requirements as any other proposed development. Any impacts and mitigation related to drainage and other hydrologic features would be identified as required per CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to drainage or other hydrologic features resulting from the project as proposed. b. Changes to Absorption Rates No Impacts - See discussion in 4.a. above. c. Flood Course Alteration No Impacts - See discussion in 4.a. above. d. Surface Water No Impacts - See discussion in 4.a. above. e. Water Quality No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for impacts to water quality and beneficial uses due to increased urbanization as well as potential impacts from erosion and sedimentation. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that a water quality management plan be prepared as part of the environmental assessment process. Any impacts to water quality and beneficial uses as well as required mitigation would be identified as required per CEQA. The applicant would also be required to comply with NPDES regulations, including the preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. Further, any additional DDs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and requirements as any other proposed development. There are no 23 AGENDA ITEM NO.__.-.-l-. PACE )0 -Of l:t 3 ~ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis anticipated Issues related to water quality resulting from the project as proposed. f. Groundwater Alteration No Impacts - See discussion in 4.a. above. g. Groundwater Quality Through Additions No Impacts - See discussion in 4.e. above. h. Groundwater Quality Through Runoff No Impacts - See discussion in 4.e. above. i. Water Reduction No Impacts - See discussion in 4.a. above. j. Flood Hazards No Impacts - See discussion in 4.a. above. 5. Air Quality a. Air Quality Violations No Impacts - While the existing County land uses and zoning are comparable to the City's land use and zoning proposed as part of this annexation, the change from the County's RR designation to the City's VLD designation would result in an increase of 43 DU over existing conditions. The increase in 43 D U resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not result in a substantial increase in population when considering its minor contribution to the entire s89-acre proposed annexation. Therefore, no additional effects to air quality would be expected from the proposed annexation over those already anticipated in the County General Plan or any regional Air Quality Management Plan. With any future development there would be a potential for changes in air quality resulting from construction activities and increased traffic. Currently there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that an air quality analysis be prepared as part of the environmental assessment process. Any impacts and mitigation related to air quality would be identified as required. There are no anticipated issues related to air quality resulting from the project as proposed. 24 I'3.GENDA ITE:M NO. ( PACE '5 I OF Y 3 Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis b. Sensitive Receptors No Impacts - See discussion in 5.a. above. c. Regional Air Quality No Impacts - See discussion in 5.a. above. d. Objectionable Odors No Impacts - See discussion in 5.a. above. 6. Noise a. Noise Levels No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for changes in noise levels. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that a Noise Study be prepared as part of the environmental assessment process. Further, any additional DDs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and requirements as any other proposed development. Any impacts and mitigation related to noise would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to noise resulting from the project as proposed. b. Noise Exposures No Impacts - See discussion in 6.a. above. 7. Biology a. Endangered or Threatened Species No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for effects to biological resources within and in the vicinity of the project site. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require preparation of all required biological studies as part of the environmental assessment process. In addition, all development projects in the City are required to be consistent with the MSHCP. Further, any additional DDs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and requirements as any other proposed development. Any future impacts and 25 AGENDA ITEM NO. , PACE '3::)- OF Y 3 Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis mitigation related to biological resources would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to biological resources resulting from the project as proposed. b. Natural Communities No Impacts - See discussion in 7.a. above. c. Wetland Habitat No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for affects to wetlands or other jurisdictional waters within and in the vicinity of the project site. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that any wetlands or jurisdictional waters be evaluated as part of the environmental assessment process. In addition, the MSHCP requires an analysis of any potential riverine/riparian and vernal pools on-site. Any impacts and mitigation related to these resources would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to wetlands or jurisdictional waters resulting from the project as proposed. 8. Aesthetics a. Scenic Vista or Highway No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for changes in scenic resources. However, there are no designated scenic vistas or scenic highways within or adjacent to the project area. There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that an evaluation for scenic vistas and highways be included as part of the environmental assessment process. The increase in 43 DU over what is currently allowed by the existing County land uses would not be expected to affect any related scenic resources. Any impacts and mitigation related to scenic resources would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to aesthetics resulting from the project as proposed. b. Aesthetic Affect No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for changes in scenic resources. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City 26 ACENDA ITEM NO. =q PACE 3 '3 OF .?> Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis could require that a visual simulation be prepared as part of the environmental assessment process. The increase in 43 DU over what is currently allowed by the existing County land uses would not be expected to affect any related scenic resources, and would be required to be included in any studies required of future development projects. Any impacts and mitigation related to aesthetics would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to aesthetics resulting from the project as proposed. 9. Light and Glare a. Light and Glare No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for additional light and glare from increased development. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the applicant would be required to comply with City design requirements as part of the environmental assessment process. Further, any additional DUs allowable as the result ofland use changes would be subject to the same requirements as any other proposed development. Any impacts and mitigation related to light and glare would be identified as required per CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to light and glare at this time. to. Population and Housing a. Exceed Population Projections No Impacts - With any approved development there is a potential for population growth. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any construction of residential or commercial development that could generate growth at this time. Further, the increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire sSg-acre proposed annexation. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that all impacts related to population increases and growth be evaluated as part of the environmental assessment process. Any related impacts and mitigation would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to population and growth resulting from the project as proposed. b. Induce Substantial Growth No Impacts. See discussion in IO.a. above. 27 AGENDA ITEM NO. PACE 3~ OF I \43 Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis c. Displace Housing No Impacts - The proposed project does not include any action that could displace housing. No development plan is included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that any potential displacement of housing be evaluated as part of the environmental assessment process. Any related impacts and mitigation would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated housing issues resulting from the project as proposed. 11. Energy and Mineral Resources a. Energy Conservation Plans Less than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any other use or disturbance of land. The resulting increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s8g-acre proposed annexation, and would not be expected to affect any energy conservation plan. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on energy conservation. Future development will be subject to state and local requirements. Impacts are expected to be less than significant. b. N on- Renewable Energy Resources Less than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any other use or disturbance of land. The resulting increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s8g-acre proposed annexation, and would not be expected to affect non-renewable energy resources. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on these resources. Future development will be subject to state and local requirements. Impacts are expected to be less than significant. c. Future Value of Resources Less Than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any other use or disturbance of land. The resulting increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s8g-acre proposed annexation, and would not be expected to affect the future value of resources. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on these resources. Future development will be subject to state and local requirements. Impacts are expected to be less than significant. 28 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE 5)" -, Of Y ') Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis d. Potential Health Hazards No Impacts - The proposed project does not approve any other use or disturbance of land. The resulting increase in 43 D U resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s8g-acre proposed annexation, and would not be expected to result in potential health hazards. Future development will be reviewed for potential health hazards, and will be subject to federal, state and local requirements. No impacts are expected to result from the project as proposed. 12. Cultural Resources a. Paleontological, Archeological, or Historical Resources No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for effects on paleontological, archeological, or historic resources. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require preparation of all required paleontological, archeological, or historic resources studies as part of the environmental assessment process. Further, any additional DUs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and requirements as any other proposed development. Any impacts and mitigation related to these resources would be identified as required per CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to cultural resources resulting from the project as proposed. b. Ethnic Cultural Values No Impacts - As discussed above in 12.a., and related to cultural resources impacts, no impacts to ethnic cultural values would be expected c. Religious or Sacred Uses No Impacts - As discussed above in 12.a., and related to cultural resources impacts, no impacts to religious or scared uses would be expected. 13. Public Services and Utilities a. Fire Protection Less than Significant - Fire protection for both the City and the County is provided by the Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD). The proposed project will not result in a jurisdiction change in service provider. The proposed annexation will not affect man-power needs, but rather funding. 29 AGENDA iTEi'!l NO. PACE 3 h or- -, ~3 Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis Upon annexation, the City of Lake Elsinore will provide fire protection through contract with Riverside County Fire Department, and tax revenue collected by the City of Lake Elsinore will be used to provide fire protection services for the annexed area. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire sSg-acre proposed annexation. At this time, no development plans have been submitted as part of this project. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and fire protection. Less than significant impacts are expected. b. Police Protection Less than Significant - Police protection is provided for the both the City and County through the Riverside County Sheriffs Department. The proposed annexation does not affect man-power needs, but rather funding. The City of Lake Elsinore will provide police protection for the proposed annexation parcels through a contract with Riverside County Sheriff s Department. Tax revenue generated will provide funding for the City to provide Police Protection services through the Riverside County Sheriffs Department. The increase in 43 D U resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire sSg-acre proposed annexation. As no new development is submitted at this time as part of the proposed project, future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and police protection, and is subject to state and City codes. Less than significant impacts are expected. c. Schools Less than Significant - The City of Lake Elsinore School District provides public education services for both the City and County in their district boundaries. The impact of annexation will not affect school facilities or man- power needs, but rather funding. Tax revenue collected from the parcels in the proposed annexation will provide educational services for the annexed area. The increase in 43 D U resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire sSg-acre proposed annexation. At this time, no development plans have been submitted as part of this project. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and education services, and is subject to City development impact fees. Less than significant impacts are expected. d. Recreation Less than Significant - The City of Lake Elsinore Community Services Department provides and maintains parks, various sports courts and fields. 30 t\GENDA iTi:r~ t~o. -, PACE ~ -, OF VJ.3 Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis Recreation activities, such as adult education, youth sports and groups, and a skate park are also provided to residents of the City of Lake Elsinore. The impact of annexation will not affect the facilities or man-power needs, but rather funding. Tax revenue will be generated directly for the City of Lake Elsinore in order to provide parks and recreational services for residents of the City, which will include the annexed area. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase in use of recreational facilities when considering its minor contribution to the entire s8g-acre proposed annexation. At this time, no development plans have been submitted as part of this project. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and parks and recreational services, and is subject to the State of California Quimby Act and City development Quimby in-lieu fees. Less than significant impacts are expected. e. Power Less than Significant - Southern California Edison (SCE) currently provides electrical power to the proposed annexation, and the annexation will have no foreseeable effect on power within the City of Lake Elsinore. No new development plans have been submitted, and future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and power / electrical distribution and supply, including those resulting from the increase in 43 additional DU. Less than significant impacts are expected. f. Natural Gas Less than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any use that would allow the disturbance of land at this time. Southern California Gas Company (SCGC) provides natural gas service to the region. While the annexation properties currently do not receive service, the annexation of these parcels will have little effect on natural gas distribution and supply, including the increase in use resulting from the additional 43 DU. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and natural gas supply. Less than significant impacts are expected. g. Communications Systems Less than Significant - Verizon provides telecommunication service to the region and properties of the proposed annexation. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and telecommunication services, including those resulting from the increase in 43 additional DU. Less than significant impacts are expected. 31 AGENDA ITEM NO. ---, PACE '1 ~ OF '1:3 Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis h. Water Less than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any use that would allow the disturbance of land at this time. Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District provides water service to the region and the proposed annexation. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and municipal water service, including those resulting from the increase in 43 additional DU. Less than significant impacts are expected. i. Sewer Less than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any use that would allow the disturbance of land at this time. Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District provides sewer service to the region and the proposed annexation. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and municipal sewer service, including those resulting from the increase in 43 additional DU. Less than significant impacts are expected. j. Storm Water Drainage Less than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any use that would allow the disturbance of land at this time. Lake Elsinore Department of Public Works maintains the City's storm water collection and drainage system. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and storm drain systems, including those resulting from the increase in 43 additional DU. Less than significant impacts are expected. k. Solid Waste and Disposal Less than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any use that would allow the disturbance of land at this time. CR&R is the franchised solid waste hauler for the City of Lake Elsinore Department. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and solid waste disposal, including those resulting from the increase in 43 additional DU. Less than significant impacts are expected. I. Maintenance Less than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any use that would allow the disturbance of land at this time. Lake Elsinore Department of Public Works maintains the City's streets, signs, lights, and signals. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and infrastructure maintenance, including those resulting PACE '"3 q OF , L/'3 32 AGEND.t\. iTEM NO. Running Deer Annexation Environmental Analysis Initial Study / Negative Declaration from the increase in 43 additional DU. Less than significant impacts are expected. m. Other Governmental Services Less Than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any use that would allow the disturbance of land at this time. The City of Lake Elsinore provides other municipal services, as mentioned, streets, parks, and schools, already utilized by the properties proposed for annexation. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public all governmental services, including those resulting from the increase in 43 additional DU. Less than significant impacts are expected. 33 AGENDi\ 'T"'"" .~o ( I I, !:I>i b'. . PACE~OF ~ ') Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis 14. Mandatory Findings of Significance The following are Mandatory Findings of Significance in accordance with Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines. 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? Less Than Significant Implementation of the proposed project includes approval of an annexation and two (2) text amendments. Because there is no development plan associated with the proposed project, it will not 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. As detailed in Section 7 Biological Resources, the proposed project will not result in any significant impacts to biological resources. Additionally, as detailed in Section 12 Cultural Resources, the proposed project will not result in any impacts to historical or archaeological resources with implementation. As a result of changes from County to City land uses, there will be an allowable increase of 43 DU. However, the project footprint as it would relate to biological and cultural resource impacts would be the same with or without the additional 43 DU. Therefore, a less than significant impact is identified. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) Less Than Significant Impact Implementation of the proposed project includes approval of an annexation and two (2) text amendments. Because there is no development plan associated with the proposed project, and based upon the analysis in the Initial Study, implementation of the proposed project would not result in impacts that are cumulatively considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of other projects. As a result of changes from County to City land uses, there will be an allowable increase of 43 DU. However, this would not be considered substantial within the overall 58g-acre project site. Therefore, a less than significant impact is identified. PACt~ Y l ( OF Y3 34 J~GElJl)}~ rrE~~~1 t;O. Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less Than Significant Impact Implementation of the proposed project includes approval of an annexation and two (2) text amendments. Because there is no development plan associated with the proposed project, and based upon the analysis in the Initial Study, implementation of the proposed project would not result in impacts that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. As a result of changes from County to City land uses, there will be an allowable increase of 43 DU. However, this would not be considered substantial within the overall s8g-acre project site. Therefore, a less than significant impact is identified. 35 AGENDA ITEM NO. PACE '-f d- OF ( Y1 Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Draft Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis 15. Persons and Organizations Consulted Riverside County Sheriffs Department Lake Elsinore Sheriffs Station 333 Limited Avenue Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Contact: Sergeant Vincent Scarpino Riverside County Fire Department Planning Section 4080 Lemon St., 2nd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Contact: Tracey Hobday / Fire Marshal Elsinore Fire Station - Station No. 10 401 Graham Avenue Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Contact: Steve Gallegos / City Fire Chief Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District P.O. Box 3000 31315 Chaney Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Contact: Cher Quinones Riverside County Municipal Waste Management Department C R & R Incorporated 10910 Dawson Canyon Rd. Corona, CA 91719 Riverside County Transportation and Land Management Agency 4080 Lemon St., 8th Floor Riverside, CA 92501 36 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE y~ OF { \..f3 ~' / ~,_..,. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION TO: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: OCTOBER 16, 2007 PREPARED BY: KIRT A. COURY, PROJECT PLANNER ANNEXATION NO. 82, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2007-05, AND ZONE CHANGE NO. 2007-05 - RUNNING DEER ANNEXATION PROJECT TITLE: APPLICANT: CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE OWNER: VARIOUS PROPERTY OWNERS PROJECT REQUEST The request before the Planning Commission is a City-initiated annexation (the "Running Deer Annexation") application requesting commencement of annexation proceedings to bring into the City's corporate boundaries 589 acres of land (the "Annexation Territory") that is currently within the jurisdiction of the County of Riverside. Commencement of the Running Deer Annexation was one of three conditions of approval placed on the Pacific Clay Annexation by the Riverside County Local Agency Formation Commission ("LAFCO"). The discretionary entitlements that are necessary in order commence said annexation proceedings are: . Negative Declaration No. 2007-03 . Annexation No.82 . General Plan Amendment No. 2007-05 . Zone Change (Pre-Zone) No. 2007-05 PROJECT LOCATION The Annexation Territory is bound by the City of Lake Elsinore to the south and east, by the Cleveland National Forest to the west, and the conditionally approved Pacific Clay Annexation to the north (Lake Elsinore Annexation No. 72, LAFCO 2005-81-1 Reorganization). (:c~ [:J.~ ,,"~'~' \ ,"'. \ . r:..t~~:~-L-_"-/b ~ _ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: ANNEXATION NO. 82, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2007-05, AND ZONE CHANGE NO. 2007-05 - RUNNING DEER ANNEXATION BACKGROUND LAFCO conditionally approved the Pacific Clay Annexation (City of Lake Elsinore Annexation No. 72, LAFCO Annexation 2005-81-1) on March 23,2006 by Resolution 21- 06. One of the three conditions of approval imposed upon the Pacific Clay Annexation is as follows: "Prior to recordation of the Certificate of Completion [for the Pacific Clay Annexation], a complete application must be submitted for annexation to the City of the pocket area south of the subject proposal. . ." Once the Pacific Clay Annexation is completed, the Annexation Territory will be completely surrounded by the City of Lake Elsinore, thereby creating an "island" of County jurisdiction. Such types of governmental organizational lines are disfavored by LAFCO and the Cortese-Knox Act. Therefore, in order to eliminate the "island" that is the Annexation Territory, the Running Deer Annexation is necessary. Public services and utilities will ultimately be provided to the Annexation Territory by the City of Lake Elsinore. The City held a public "neighborhood information" meeting on June 28, 2007 for the purposes of informing those within and adjacent to the Annexation Territory that an annexation is being processed. General questions were raised regarding the process and any potential development. Staff described the annexation process and explained that no development proposal is being considered with this annexation application. Attached for the Planning Commission review is a copy of the flyer and information distributed to the adjacent and within property owners regarding the annexation and neighborhood meeting (Exhibit D). ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Project VacanWarious Riverside County : R-A-10 Site Single Family (486 acres), R-A-2 Y2 (67 Residences acres), and M-R (35 acres) City of Lake Elsinore: Future SP (243 acres), M (225 acres). VLD (53 acres ,LM 67 acres City of Lake Elsinore: Future Specific Plan North Vacant/Mining Operation East VacanWarious Single Family Residences Single Family Residential City of Lake Elsinore: M-3 (Mineral Resources and Related Minin R-1 (Single Family Residential and Specific Plan Low Medium Density Residential and Specific Plan Specific Plan South Alberhill Ranch Specific Plan AGENDA HE,1 NO. PAGE ~ 8 0;: 2.S~ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: ANNEXATION NO. 82, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2007 -05, AND ZONE CHANGE NO. 2007-05 - RUNNING DEER ANNEXATION West Vacant Riverside County: OS (Open City of Lake Elsinore: OS Space )(Cleveland National (Open Space)(Cleveland Forest) National Forest) PROJECT DESCRIPTION As mentioned above, there are three entitlements that are necessary in order to process the Running Deer Annexation. They are: (1) the Annexation itself (2) Zone Change No. 2007 -05 and (3) General Plan Amendment No. 2007-05. Each entitlement is more fully explained below. ANNEXA TION NO. 82 - RUNNING DEER ANNEXA TION The project site is presently in the County of Riverside, but within the City of Lake Elsinore Sphere of Influence. Project implementation requires LAFCO Annexation of the project site into the Corporate Boundaries of the City of Lake Elsinore, in accordance with provisions contained in the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (Government Code Section 56000-56001). ZONE CHANGE NO. (PRE-ZONE) 2007-05 The Cortese-Knox Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (the "Cortese- Knox") states that LAFCO shall require, as a condition of annexation, that the local jurisdiction prezone territory to be annexed. (Government Code Section 56375(a)) In accordance with this requirement, the City of Lake Elsinore has assigned prezoning designations for the Annexation Territory that are equivalent to the current zoning that the properties are given under the County's code. The proposed Pre-Zoning designations for the project area are Rural Mountainous Residential (R-M-R; 1 DU/10 acres), Rural Residential (RR; 1 DU/2 acres), and Open Space (OS; No residential development; Recreation District Overlay does allow for mining and quarrying). The identified Pre-Zoning designations have been selected to assure consistency between the County's and the City's General Plan Land Use designations. Table 1 below provides the descriptions and acreages for each County and City land use and zone. As currently written, the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code in Section 17.35.020 permits the development of one single family dwelling unit per ten acres of land on property zoned as Open Space if the single family dwelling unit is used in conjunction with agricultural uses. The City of Lake Elsinore is currently considering a Text Amendment to Section 17.35.020 to prohibit all residential dwelling units within the Open Space zone. This change to the City's Zoning Code will achieve consistency as between the City's and the County's designations. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE "'.> 2 OF '& 1 "-- PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: ANNEXATION NO. 82, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2007 -05, AND ZONE CHANGE NO. 2007-05 - RUNNING DEER ANNEXATION In addition, Section 17.07.010 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code establishes a Resource Conservation Overlay District to preserve and serve various natural resources of the City. In light of the City's newly adopted M-3 Mineral Resources and Related Manufacturing District, the Resource Conservation Overlay District is no longer necessary because the M-3 zone consumes the field of resource conservation. For that reason, the City is also considering a Text Amendment to Chapter 17.06 to remove the Resource Conservation Overlay District and reserve Chapter 17.06 for future designations. Once the aforementioned Text Amendments are approved by the City Council, the allowable densities under the City's land use designation and pre-zoning will be equivalent or similar to the densities allowable under the County's existing land use and zoning. The purpose for this is to neither "de-value" the properties within Annexation Territory by lowering the allowable density, norto bring forth a substantial increase in density as part of this annexation. As shown in Table 1, the change within 143 acres of the annexation area from the County's Rural Residential at one (1) dwelling unit (DU) per five (5) acres would allow 29 DU as compared to the City's Very Low Density at one (1) DU per two (2) acres which would allow 72 DU. This would result in a non-significant increase of 43 DU over the existing County conditions. This would not be a substantial increase when considering those 43 DUs in the context of the entire 589-acre proposed annexation. No development application is included as part of the annexation. Any future development applications will be subject to environmental analysis as required pursuant to CEQA. Proposed Land Use after GPA is a roved Existing Zoning NA Future SP (243) M (225) VLD (53) LM 67 Mt(410) VLD (143) OS 35 NA RM (410) RR (143) OS-MR (35) R-M-R (410) RR (143) OS 35 Note: To date, the County's current zoning designations have not been made consistent with their land uses approved in their General Plan Update. Proposed Zoning R-A-10 (486) R-A-2 % (67) M-R 35 NA Pre- f.\.CEND.[}, ITEril NO. .)?- PAGE 4 ~ . PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: ANNEXATION NO. 82, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2007 -05, AND ZONE CHANGE NO. 2007-05 - RUNNING DEER ANNEXATION Existina County land Use RM = Rural Mountainous; 1 DU/10 acres RR = Rural Residential; 1 DU/5 acres OS-MR = Open Space Mineral Residential; no DU; mineral extraction only Existina City land Use Future SP = Future Specific Plan; This land use is being eliminated from the proposed General Plan Update, anticipated for approval in the first quarter of 2008. M = Mountainous; 1 DU/10 acres VLD = Very Low Density; 1 DU/2 acres (i.e., 0.5 DU/1 acre) LM = Low Medium; 6 DU/acre County Zonina R-A-10 = Residential Agriculture 10; 1 DU/10 acres R-A-2 % = Residential Agriculture 2 %; 1 DU/2.5 acres MR = Mineral Resources; No allowable residential development; Mineral extraction only City Proposed land Use (after GPA approval) MT = Mountainous; 1 DU/10 acres VLD = Very Low Density; 1 DU/2 acres (i.e., 0.5 DU/1 acre) OS = Open Space City Proposed Pre-Zonina R-M-R = Rural Mountainous Residential; 1 DU/10 acres RR = Rural Residential; 1 DU/2 acres OS = No residential development; Recreation District Overlay does allow for mining and quarrying GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2007-05 The project site is currently located within the City of Lake Elsinore's Sphere of Influence (SOl). A General Plan Amendment is necessary to modify the City's boundary to incorporate the site into the City and to adjust the land use designations such that the City's designations match the designations given to the property under the Riverside County General Plan. For example, the City's current land use designation of Future Specific Plan will be eliminated and replaced with a Mountainous designation, which is similarto and consistent with the Rural Mountainous designation of the county's General Plan. Also, those parcels designated as Rural Residential in the County will be designated as Very Low Density Residential under the City's General Plan Land Use Map. Finally, those parcels designated as Open Space under the County's General Plan will be designated as Open AGENDA ITEM NO. )1._ PAGE S ~ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: ANNEXATION NO. 82, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2007 -05, AND ZONE CHANGE NO. 2007-05 - RUNNING DEER ANNEXATION Space under the City's General Plan. These Land Use Designations will match and be consistent in terms of acreage, density and use for the identified project area. ANALYSIS This proposal is limited to the action of Pre-Zoning and annexing the properties into the City of Lake Elsinore. Pre-zoning the property satisfies a regulatory procedure that is required by the Cortese-Knox Act and which sets the zoning designations for the territory once it becomes a part of the City. Pre-Zoning the property does not in and of itself entitle a property owner to develop their property. Entitlements to develop property must be initiated by application with the City of Lake Elsinore. The City is presently undertaking a comprehensive update of the General Plan that is anticipated to be completed in the first quarter of 2008. Draft versions of the updated General Plan include the project site, as well as areas surrounding the site to the east, south and west in the City's SOl. The proposed General Plan Amendment and annexation are consistent with the City's existing and draft updated General Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The proposed Negative Declaration No. 2007-03 has been prepared pursuant to Article 6 (Negative Declaration Process) and Section 15070 (Decision to Prepare a Negative or Mitigated Negative Declaration) of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). Based on the Initial Study prepared for the project, it was determined that the project will not result in any significant effects on the environment. Further, pursuant to Section 15073 (Public Review of a Proposed Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the intended Negative Declaration was submitted to the State Clearinghouse on September 4, 2007 for the required 20-day review period. It should be noted that staff has received six (6) written comment letters relative to the Negative Declaration and/or Annexation. The commenting entities were the Pechanga, Soboba, Pala, South Coast Association of Governments (SCAG), Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFCWCD), and Mr. William Bishop. The Pala, SCAG, and RCFCWCD had no concerns about the proposed project. The Pechanga understand that no development is planned with this project as proposed but requested to be contacted should any conditions change with regard to development of this area. The Soboba originally requested formal government to government consultation. However, Staff spoke with their representative and explained that there would be no "ground- disturbing" activities associated with this project as proposed. Based on this additional coordination, the Soboba request only that they be contacted should a development proposal be submitted, and at that time they would request Tribal monitoring. AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ PAGE { OFA_ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: ANNEXATION NO. 82, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2007 -05, AND ZONE CHANGE NO. 2007-05 - RUNNING DEER ANNEXATION The letter from Mr. Bishop expressed concerns that this annexation was "down-zoning" his property from 3 dwelling units (DU) to 1 DU/acre. The annexation only brings forth the existing County land uses and zoning into the City as is. In other words, the allowable densities under the City's land use designations and pre-zoning associated with this annexation are equivalent or similar to the densities allowable under the County's existing land use and zoning. The purpose for this was neither to "de-value" the properties within the annexation nor was it to allow for an increase in density that would have resulted in a higher level CEQA document such as a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact Report. The only deviation from this approach was that the City's Very Low Density (1 DU/2 acres) as compared to the existing County's Rural Residential (1 DU/5 acres) would actually allow for a non-significant increase of 43 DU over a 143-acre area within the proposed annexation. Mr. Bishop's concerns appear to be more related to changes associated with the County's land uses and zoning before and after the update of the Riverside County General Plan. The project area is located within criteria cells of the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). As there is no ground-disturbance associated with this project as proposed, there would be no impacts to habitat or other resources covered pursuant to the MSHCP. Therefore, at this time it is unnecessary to process an MSHCP consistency analysis. Should future development proposals be submitted, an MSHCP consistency analysis would be required at that time. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the following Resolutions; Resolution No. 2007-_ recommending the City Council adopt Negative Declaration No. 2007-03; Resolution No. 2007-_ recommending the City Council request that LAFCO commence proceedings for Annexation No. 82; Resolution No. 2007-_ recommending the City Council approve General Plan Amendment No. 2007-05, Resolution No. 2007-_, recommending the City Council approve an ordinance effecting Zone Change (Pre-Zoning) NO.2007 -05. PREPARED BY: KIRT A. COURY, PROJECT PLANNER APPROVED BY: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, /h//r1 / DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT /' / / // ~ ATTACHMENTS: 1. VICINITY MAP 2. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS 3. EXHIBITS . REDUCTIONS (8 % x 11) " "0 ~ - "",:..'" ~\ ~"""r~'~:," ,\: . ~ ~ t~.,."" "... 'I _,J ., - f~'-'~""~ .'} ("Iii. '. __ ,": '" \':. ---....-. - . It ,~ --' ,'"...~- PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: ANNEXATION NO. 82, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2007-05, AND ZONE CHANGE NO. 2007-05 - RUNNING DEER ANNEXATION Exhibit 'A' Negative Declaration No. 2007-03 Exhibit 'B' Running Deer Annexation Plan of Services Exhibit 'c' Proposed Annexation Area Map Exhibit 'D' Existing and Proposed General Plan & Zoning Designation Maps Exhibit 'E' Neighborhood Information Flyer and FAQ Sheet ACr.Q"."" ,....,.,~ ~'O Q . 'C!\lUh II Cil-l IV. . D ___ Pflf''" 1> ~,\ __ (L <( ~ >- ...... - z - u :> RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ADOPTION OF NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2007-03 FOR TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2007-04, TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2007 -05, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2007-05; ZONE CHANGE (PRE- ZONE) NO. 2007-05; AND ANNEXATION NO. 82 FOR THE RUNNING DEER TERRITORY WHEREAS, The City of Lake Elsinore is considering the approval of Text Amendment No. 2007-04, Text Amendment No. 2007-05, General Plan Amendment No. 2007-05, Zone Change (PreZone) No. 2007-05, Annexation No. 82, and Negative Declaration No. 2007-03 (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, the Project is subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code, Sections 21000, et seq.: "CEQA") and the State Implementation Guidelines for CEQA (14 California Code of Regulations, Sections 15000, et seq.: "CEQA Guidelines") because the Project involves an activity which may cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and involves the issuance of a lease, permit license, certificate, or other entitlement for use by one or more public agencies (Public Resources Code, Section 21065); and WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15063, the City conducted an Initial Study to determine if the Project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based upon the results of that Initial Study, there was no substantial evidence that the Project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment; and WHEREAS, based upon the results of the Initial Study, and based upon the standards set forth in CEQA Guidelines, Section 15070, it was determined appropriate to prepare and circulate Negative Declaration No. 2007-03 for the Project (the "Negative Declaration"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15072, on September 4, 2007, the City duly issued a notice of intent to adopt the Negative Declaration; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council regarding negative declarations; and WHEREAS, public notice of the Negative Declaration has been given, and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on October 16, 2007. AGENDA ITEr!. NO.--&_ PACE \ a OF. , - PLANNING COMMISION RESOLUTION 2007- PAGE 2 OF 3 NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has evaluated all comments, written and oral, received from persons who have reviewed the Negative Declaration. SECTION 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council that the Negative Declaration for the Project is adequate and has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's procedures for implementation of CEQA. The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Negative Declaration and finds that the Negative Declaration represents the independent judgment of the City. SECTION 3. The Planning Commission further finds and determines that none of the circumstances listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5 requiring recirculation of the Negative Declaration are present and that it would be appropriate to adopt the Negative Declaration as proposed. SECTION 4. The Planning Commission hereby makes, adopts, and incorporates the following findings regarding the lack of potential environmental impacts of the Project and the analysis and conclusions set forth in the Negative Declaration: 1. Revisions in the Project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant before a Negative Declaration and Initial Study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur. Based upon the Initial Study conducted for the Project, there is no substantial evidence suggesting that the Project may have a significant effect on the environment. Additionally, the design of the Project, coupled with the City's standard conditions of approval, ensure that the Project will not have a significant effect on the environment. 2. There is no substantial evidence, in the light of the whole record before the agency, that the Project as revised may have significant effect on the environment. Pursuant to the evidence received, and in the light of the whole record presented, the Project will not have a significant effect on the environment. SECTION 5. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. t... ~ PACE \ ,_ ~~OE:-'K\ PLANNING COMMISION RESOLUTION 2007-_ PAGE 3 OF 3 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of October 2007, by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: Rolfe M. Preisendanz Director of Community Development Michael O'Neal, Chairman Lake Elsinore Planning Commission P~CEf'-.HJl~ rrEL"1 SIJO. PAC::: \ d.. ~ OF 0"-= RESOLUTION NO. 2007- RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REQUEST LAFCO COMMENCE PROCEEDINGS TO ANNEX APPROXIMATELY 589 ACRES OF LAND INTO THE CORPORATE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE (ANNEXATION NO. 82) WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elsinore is considering the annexation of approximately 589 acres of land (the "Annexation No. 82"), which is currently within the City's Sphere of Influence and which is bound to the south and east by the City of Lake Elsinore, to the west by the Cleveland National Forest and to the north by the conditionally approved Pacific Clay Annexation (the "Running Deer Territory") into the corporate boundaries of the City of Lake Elsinore; and WHEREAS, Annexation No. 82 is being requested pursuant to that certain condition of approval imposed upon the Pacific Clay Annexation requiring that the City of Lake Elsinore submit an application to commence annexation proceedings for the Running Deer Territory and pursuant to the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (Government Code Section 56000-56001); and WHEREAS, in accordance with the Riverside LAFCO rules and procedures, Government Code Sections 56375 and 65859, and all other applicable laws, the City of Lake Elsinore is processing a Pre-Zone (Zone Change) for the Running Deer Territory; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council for annexations; and WHEREAS, public notice of Annexation No. 82 has been given and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing with respect to this item on October 16, 2007. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the request for Annexation No. 82, prior to making a decision to recommend that the City Council commence proceedings to annex the Running Deer Territory. The Planning Commission finds and determines that Negative Declaration No. 2007-03 is adequate and prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) based upon the findings and determinations set forth in the Planning Commission resolution recommending that the City Council adopt Negative Declaration No. 2007-03. AGENDP. ITEM NO. PACE'S 8 OF D\ PLANNING COMMISION RESOLUTION 2007- PAGE 2 OF 3 SECTION 2. That in accordance with the Cortese-Knox Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985, Government Code Section 57082 and the City of Lake Elsinore the following findings for the approval of the Annexation have been made as follows: 1. The proposed annexation area is contiguous to the City of Lake Elsinore and will not create pockets or islands. The Running Deer Territory is contiguous to the western boundaries of the City of Lake Elsinore. Annexation 82 promotes the reasonable extension of the city boundary area by eliminating pockets/islands of County jurisdiction. In addition, Riverside LAFCO conditionally approved the Pacific Clay Annexation (City of Lake Elsinore Annexation No. 72, LAFCO Annexation 2005-81-1) on March 23, 2006 by Resolution 21-06 to require that the City submit an application to LAFCO for the annexation of the Running Deer Territory. Public services and utilities will be provided to this newly annexed area by the City of Lake Elsinore. 2. The proposed annexation will not result in any adverse significant impacts on the environment. The annexation will not have a significant effect on the environment and is consistent with the City's General Plan. Negative Declaration No. 2007-03 is adequate and prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 3. The proposed annexation will allow development of a well-designed project in the City. This proposal is limited to the action of Pre-Zoning the Running Deer Territory and commencing annexation proceedings therefor. No development proposal is being considered with this annexation. Further, the allowable densities under the City's land use designation and pre-zoning are equivalent to the densities allowable under the County's existing land use and zoning. SECTION 3. Based upon all of the evidence presented, and the above findings, the Planning Commission hereby recommends the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore request that LAFCO commence proceedings for Annexation No. 82. SECTION 4. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. A IT.'"~ i,IO ~ AGEND t,,\ ~ '_ I PAGE ) ~ or- ~ \ PLANNING COMMISION RESOLUTION 2007-_ PAGE 3 OF 3 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of October 2007, by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: Rolfe M. Preisendanz Director of Community Development Michael O'Neal, Chairman Lake Elsinore Planning Commission AGENDA ITEM NO. '8 PAGE_ \5 OF::M - RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2007-05 WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elsinore is considering an amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map, General Plan Amendment No. 2007-05, which will change the City's boundary (the "General Plan Amendment") to incorporate 589 acres of land that is bound by the City of Lake Elsinore to the south and east, by the Cleveland National Forest to the west, and the conditionally approved Pacific Clay Annexation to the north (the "Running Deer Territory"); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council for changes to the approved General Plan Land Use Map; and WHEREAS, public notice of the General Plan Amendment has been given, and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on October 16, 2007. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the proposed General Plan Amendment, prior to making a decision to recommend that the City Council approve the proposed amendment to the City's boundary line. The Planning Commission finds and determines that Negative Declaration No. 2007-03 is adequate and prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning law and the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, the Planning Commission makes the following findings for the approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2007-05: 1. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not be: a) detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within the City, or b) injurious to the property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City. The proposed General Plan Amendment has been analyzed relative to its potential to be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort and welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment. The proposed land use designations of Very Low Density Residential, Mountainous, and Open Space are consistent with the County's General Plan Land Use designations. ACENDA ITEM NO. 'E PAcE--1Lm: ~ \ --- PLANNING COMMISION RESOLUTION 2007- PAGE 2 OF 3 2. The proposed General Plan Amendment will permit reasonable development of the area consistent with its constraints and will make the area more compatible with adjacent properties. The proposed land use designations of Vel}' Low Density Residential, Mountainous, and Open Space are consistent with the County's General Plan Land Use designations. Therefore, there is little or no change to the anticipated land use for the site. 3. The proposed General Plan Amendment would establish a land use designation and usage more in character with the subject property's location, access, and constraints. The General Plan Amendment proposes a boundal}' adjustment and the proposed land use designations of Vel}' Low Density Residential, Mountainous, and Open Space are consistent with the County's General Plan Land Use designations. 4. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not have a significant effect on the environment. The General Plan Amendment does not propose any significant change to existing land use designations and will not result in any significant environmental impacts as explained in Negative Declaration No. 2007-03. SECTION 3. Based upon all of the evidence presented, and the above findings, the Planning Commission hereby recommends the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore approve General Plan Amendment No. 2007-05. SECTION 4. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of October 2007, by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Michael O'Neal, Chairman Lake Elsinore Planning Commission AGEND,(\ ITEM NO. PACE '\. ~ m: .~ \ PLANNING COMMISION RESOLUTION 2007-_ PAGE 3 OF 3 ATTEST: Rolfe M. Preisendanz Director of Community Development ACENDA ITEM NO. ~ PACE ,~ OF ~ '\ RESOLUTION NO. 2007- RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVE AN ORDINANCE EFFECTING ZONE CHANGE (PRE-ZONE) NO. 2007-05 WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elsinore is considering the annexation of' approximately 589 acres of land (the "Annexation No. 82"), which is currently within the City's Sphere of Influence and which is bound to the south and east by the City of Lake Elsinore, to the west by the Cleveland National Forest and to the north by the conditionally approved Pacific Clay Annexation (the "Running Deer Territory") into the corporate boundaries of the City of Lake Elsinore; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the Riverside LAFCO rules and procedures, Government Code Sections 56375 and 65859, the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (Government Code Section 56000-56001), and all other applicable laws, the City of Lake Elsinore is processing a Pre-Zone (Zone Change) for the Running Deer Territory; and WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elsinore has proposed to pre-zone the Running Deer Territory area as Rural Mountainous Residential (R-M-R; 1 DU/10 acres), Rural Residential (RR; 1 DU/2 acres), and Open Space (OS); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council for changes to the approved Zoning Map; and WHEREAS, public notice of the Zone Change has been given, and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on October 2,2007. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the proposed Zone Change No. 2007-06, prior to making a decision to recommend that the City Council approve the proposed amendment to the Zoning Map. The Planning Commission finds and determines that Negative Declaration No. 2007-03 is adequate and prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning law and the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, the Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings for the approval of Zone Change No. 2007-05: 1. The proposed zone change will not be; a) detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the AGENDA ITEM NO. ~- PAGE~ .5 ~. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2007- PAGE 2 OF 3 neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within the City, or b) injurious to the property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City. The proposed Zone Change has been analyzed relative to its potential to be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort and welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed Zone Change. Staff concluded that the project does not propose land uses, densities, or development patterns that will jeopardize the health and safety of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the property. Health, safety, and welfare will not be degraded as a result of this project. 2. The proposed action will be consistent with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the General Plan and the development standards established with the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. The Zone Change is consistent with the General Plan's underlying land use designations of Mountainous (1 DU/10 ACRE), Very Low Density Residential (.5 DU/ACRE, and Open Space (OS) for the project site. The Zone Change will allow development of a well-balanced and functional mixed-use project comprised of residential uses, and a public elementary school. SECTION 3. Based upon all of the evidence presented, and the above findings, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore approve the proposed Zone Change No. 2007-05. SECTION 4. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of October 2007, by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Michael O'Neal, Chairman Lake Elsinore Planning Commission ATTEST: ~ AGEI~~~~EXO OF ~ \ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2007-_ PAGE 3 OF 3 Rolfe M. Preisendanz Director of Community Development AGENDA iTEf,j NO. "6 PAGE ~. ~ _ OF-ID- INITIAL STUDY / NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2007-03 RUNNING DEER ANNEXATION PREPARED By: CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 130 SOUTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA 92530 AUGUST 2007 EXHIBIT AGEND;~ ITGil NO. PACE ~~ OF Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Table of Contents I. INTRODUCfION 1 II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 6 III. INITIAL STUDY / ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 11 IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 18 1. LAND USE PLANNING 18 2. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION 19 3. GEOLOGY 21 4. HYDROLOGY/WATER QUALITY 23 5. AIR QUALITY 24 6. NOISE 25 7. BIOLOGY 25 8. AESTHETICS 26 9. LIGHT AND GLARE 27 10.POPULATION AND HOUSING 27 11. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES 28 12. CULTURAL RESOURCES 29 13. PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES 29 14.MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 34 15. PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED 36 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1 REGIONAL AND VICINITY MAPS FIGURE 2 AERIAL PHOTO / PROJECf SITE 6 7 LIST OFTABLES TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF LAND USE AND ZONING CHANGES 8 ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT A - NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT; NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY ATTACHMENT B - CEQA DISTRIBUTION LIST FOR PUBLIC REVIEW AGEND/'~ ~Tr7_n t'JO. PACE ~?> ~ OF Q \ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Introduction I. Introduction A. Purpose This document is an Initial Study and Negative Declaration for evaluation of environmental impacts resulting from the annexation of approximately 589 acres, located within the City of Lake Elsinore Sphere of Influence. This annexation is a Condition of Approval required by the Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) in order to fully approve the Annexation 2005-81-1, Pacific Clay Annexation No. 72. In addition to analyzing the impacts of the annexation, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration also evaluate impacts resulting from minor revisions (i.e., amendments) to two (2) sections of the City of Lake Elsinore Zoning Code. For purposes of this document, this annexation and related text amendments as described in Section II Project Description will be called the "proposed project." B. California Environmental Quality Act Requirements As defined by Section 15063 of the State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, an Initial Study (IS) is prepared primarily to provide the Lead Agency with information to use as the basis for determining whether an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Supplemental EIR, Negative Declaration (ND), or Addendum would be appropriate for providing the necessary environmental documentation and clearance for any proposed project. This Initial Study has determined that the proposed annexation of the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a NEGATIVE DECLARATION (ND) has been prepared. This Initial Study and Negative Declaration have been prepared in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et. seq.); Section 15070 of the State Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15000, et. seq.); applicable requirements of the City of Lake Elsinore; and the regulations, requirements, and procedures of any other responsible public agency or an agency with jurisdiction by law. The City of Lake Elsinore is designated the Lead Agency, in accordance with Section 15050 of the CEQA Guidelines. The Lead Agency is the public agency, which has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project, which may have significant effects upon the environment. 1 ACENDA ITEM NO. ~ <g PAGE-,~LOF \ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Introduction C. Intended Uses of Initial Study and Negative Declaration This Initial Study and Negative Declaration are informational documents intended to inform City of Lake Elsinore decision-makers, other responsible or interested agencies, and the general public of potential environmental effects of the proposed project. The environmental review process has been established to enable public agencies to evaluate environmental consequences and to examine and implement methods of eliminating or reducing any potentially adverse impacts. While CEQA requires that consideration be given to avoiding environmental damage, the Lead Agency and other responsible public agencies must balance or override adverse environmental effects based upon other public objectives, including economic and social goals. As the Lead Agency, the City of Lake Elsinore has determined that environmental clearance for the proposed project can be provided with a Negative Declaration. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15205, the Initial Study and Draft Negative Declaration will be circulated for a period of 20 days for public and agency review. Comments received on the document will be considered by the Lead Agency before it acts on the proposed project. D. Contents of Initial Study This Initial Study is organized to facilitate a basic understanding of the existing setting and environmental implications of the as follows: I. INTRODUCTION presents an introduction to the entire report. This section identifies City of Lake Elsinore contact persons involved in the process, scope of environmental review, environmental procedures, and incorporation by reference documents. II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION describes the proposed project. A description of discretionary approvals and permits required for proposed project implementation is also included. III. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM contains the City's Environmental Checklist Form. The checklist form presents results of the environmental evaluation for the proposed project and those issue areas that would have either a significant impact, potentially significant impact, or no impact. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS evaluates each response provided in the environmental checklist form. Each response checked in the checklist form is discussed and supported with sufficient data and analysis. As appropriate, each response discussion describes and 2 .IDA'-~~' r.", "'8 AGEI"PA~~t~S~OF -y~ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Introduction identifies specific impacts anticipated with proposed project implementation. In this section, mitigation measures are also recommended, as appropriate, to reduce adverse impacts to levels of "less than significant" where possible. Also included are the MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE in accordance with Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines. Further, PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED identifies those persons consulted and involved in preparation of this Initial Study. E. Scope of Environmental Analysis For evaluation of environmental impacts, each question from the Environmental Checklist Form is stated and responses are provided according to the analysis undertaken as part of the Initial Study. All responses will take into account the whole action involved, including offsite as well as onsite, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. Project impacts and effects will be evaluated and quantified, when appropriate. To each question, there are four possible responses, including: 1. No Impact: A "No Impact" response is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to the proposed project. 2. Less Than Significant Impact: Development associated with project implementation will have the potential to impact the environment. These impacts, however, will be less than the levels of thresholds that are considered significant and no additional analysis is required. 3. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: This applies where incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact" The Lead Agency must describe the mitigation measures and explain how the measures reduce the effect to a less than significant level. 4. Potentially Significant Impact: Future implementation will have impacts that are considered significant and additional analysis and possibly an EIR are required to identify mitigation measures that could reduce these impacts to less than significant levels. F. Incorporation by Reference and Technical Studies Information, findings, and conclusions contained in this document are based on incorporation by reference of the City of Lake Elsinore General 3 AC'-'-""'A !TC'.,' Hi! C) t:D'1ilt ~ ~ if,.<~': . 0 PAGECJ-b,-OF ~\ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Introduction Plan and technical studies specific to the proposed project, which are discussed in the following section. Incorporation by Reference Incorporation by reference is a procedure for reducing the size of EIRs and/or Negative Declarations (ND) and is most appropriate for including long, descriptive, or technical materials that provide general background information, but do not contribute directly to the specific analysis of the proposed project itself. This procedure is particularly useful when an EIR or ND relies on a broadly-drafted EIR for its evaluation of cumulative impacts of related projects (Las Virgenes Homeowners Federation v. County of Los Angeles [1986, 177 Ca. 3d 300]). If an EIR or ND relies on information from a supporting study that is available to the public, the EIR or ND cannot be deemed unsupported by evidence or analysis (San Francisco Ecology Center v. City and County of San Francisco [1975, 48 Ca.3d 584, 595]). This document incorporates by reference the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan (1995), the Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR (1991), and the Riverside County General Plan (2003). When an EIR or Negative Declaration incorporates a document by reference, the incorporation must comply with Section 15150 of the CEQA Guidelines as follows: · The incorporated documents must be available to the public or be a matter of public record (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150[a]). All incorporated documents are available, along with this document, at the City of Lake Elsinore, Community Development Department, 130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530, ph. (951) 674-3124, during normal business hours. · The incorporated documents must be available for inspection by the public at an office of the lead agency (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150[b]). Documents are available at the City of Lake Elsinore, Community Development Department, 130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530, ph. (951) 674-3124, during normal business hours. · This document must summarize the portion of the document(s) being incorporated by reference or briefly describe information that cannot be summarized. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150[c]). The Negative Declaration brings forth information from the City and County General Plans relates to existing and proposed land use and zoning designations, as applicable. · This document must include the State identification number of the incorporated document (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150[d]). The State Clearinghouse Number for the General Plan EIR is 91122065. 4 r\C::':NDf.\ ~,10. ~ PAGl:_ ~l._OF ~ \ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Introduction · The material to be incorporated in this document will include general background information (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150[f]). 5 PA~~=;~ito~'6 \ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Project Description II. Project Description A. Project Location and Setting The proposed annexation comprises of 589.28-acres located within the City of Lake Elsinore Sphere of Influence along the western border of the City of Lake Elsinore (Figure 1). The site is bordered by the conditionally approved Pacific Clay Annexation (LAFCO #2005-81-1) to the north, the Cleveland National Forest to the west, and the City of Lake Elsinore to the south and east, and is comprised of 37 parcels (Figure 2). These parcels are as follows: 389-290-001 389-290-014 389-290-023 389-290-029 391-790-007 391-790-012 391-800-004 391-800-009 389-290-002 389-290-017 389-290-025 391-250-003 391-790-008 391-790-013 391-800-005 391-800-010 389-290-009 389-290-019 389-290-026 391-790-001 391-790-009 391-800-001 391-800-006 389-290-010 389-290-020 389-290-027 391-790-005 391-790-010 391-800-002 391-800-007 389-290-013 389-290-022 389-290-028 391-790-006 391-790-011 391-800-003 391-800-008 The topography of the site is gentle sloping hills and plateaus on the eastern portion to rugged mountainous terrain on the western portion, with a valley between the two. There are several rural residential dwellings onsite (5-7) in combination with agricultural related buildings. 6 AGENDA ITEr!! NO. ~ PAGE-" 1..C\.._OF 1) \ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Project Description The site consists of mostly undisturbed land, although there are some portions of the site used as an illegal dump site for household and agricultural waste and construction debris. B. Project Purpose As mentioned above, Riverside LAFCO conditionally approved the Pacific Clay Annexation (City of Lake Elsinore Annexation No. 72, LAFCO Annexation 2005-81-1) on March 23, 2006 by Resolution 21-06. Specifically, the following is the condition of approval that calls for the annexation of the project site: "Prior to recordation of the Certificate of Completion, a complete application must be submitted for annexation to the City of the pocket area south of the subject proposaL."! The annexation will alleviate the "island effect" of Riverside County land that will be created once the Pacific Clay annexation is approved. Public services and utilities will be provided to this newly annexed area by the City of Lake Elsinore. I Part 6, section (d) of Resolution 21-06 passed March 23, 2006 by Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission. 7 I\GEN~~~~:;~ _} ~ \ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Project Description c. Project Description The proposed project annexation involves a change from existing County land uses and zoning to comparable City of Lake Elsinore land uses and zoning. Table 1 below provides the descriptions and acreages for each County and City land use and zone. The allowable densities under the City's land use designation and pre- zoning are equivalent or similar to the densities allowable under the County's existing land use and zoning. The purpose for this is to neither "de-value" the properties within the annexation area by lowering the allowable density, nor to bring forth a substantial increase in density as part of this annexation. However, as shown in Table 1, the change within 143 acres of the annexation area from the County's Rural Residential at one (1) dwelling unit (DU) per five (5) acres would allow 29 DU as compared to the City's Very Low Density at one (1) DU per two (2) acres which would allow 72 DU. This would result in a non-significant increase of 43 DU over the existing County conditions. This would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire 589-acre proposed annexation. Further, no development application is included as part of the annexation. Any future development applications will be subject to environmental analysis as required pursuant to CEQA. Table 1 Existing and Proposed Land Uses and Zoning ( . 1 8 ) approxImately 5 ~9 acres Riverside County (acres) City of Lake Elsinore (acres) RM (410) Future 8P (243) Existing Land Use RR (143) M (225) 08- MR (35) VLD (53) LM (67) Proposed Land Use NA Mt (410) VLD (143) after GPA is approved 08 (35) R-A-lO (486) Existing Zoning R-A-2 1/2 (67) NA M-R (35) R-M-R (410) Proposed Pre-Zoning NA RR (143) OS (35) Note: To date, the County's current zoning designations have not been made conSIstent WIth their land uses approved in their General Plan Update. 8 1:"'-"1"'" ..,,..., "0 ~ --.'< 'L!,":. i ? .:, ,:~". .,; n~;l '!iV~.1t......-'r~ ~"...~h 'Wi . PAGE 3 \ OF ~ \ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Project Description Existing County Land Use RM = Rural Mountainous; 1 DU/10 acres RR = Rural Residential; 1 DU/5 acres OS-MR = Open Space Mineral Residential; no DU; mineral extraction only Existing City Land Use Future SP = Future Specific Plan; This land use is being eliminated from the proposed General Plan Update, anticipated for approval in December 2007. M = Mountainous; 1 DU /10 acres VLD = Very Low Density; 1 DU/2 acres (Le., 0.5 DU/1 acre) LM = Low Medium; 6 DU/acre County Zoning R-A-lO = Residential Agriculture 10; 1 DU/lO acres R-A-2 1/2 = Residential Agriculture 21/2; 1 DU/2.5 acres MR = Mineral Resources; No allowable residential development; Mineral extraction only City Proposed Land Use (after GPA approval) MT = Mountainous; 1 DU/10 acres VLD = Very Low Density; 1 DU/2 acres (Le., 0.5 DU/1 acre) OS = Open Space City Proposed Pre-Zoning R-M-R = Rural Mountainous Residential; 1 DU/lO acres RR = Rural Residential; 1 DU/2 acres OS = No residential development; Recreation District Overlay does allow for mining and quarrying As part of the proposed project, two (2) text amendments to the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code will also be necessary, and are described as follows: . Amend and restate Section 17.35.020 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) regarding residential uses in Open Space Districts. The purpose of this text amendment is to delete Section 17.35.020(A)(4) from the LEMC because it is inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the Open Space District and because the Rural-Mountainous-Residential zone already provides opportunity for landowners to develop their property at one dwelling unit per ten acres. This revision will ensure the protection of the health, safety, comfort and general welfare of persons working and/ or residing in Lake Elsinore by prohibiting residential uses in areas where human habitation is dangerous. . Delete and reserve Chapter 17.06 of the LEMC regarding the Resource Conservation Overlay District. The recently added Chapter 17.61 to the LEMC establishing the M-3 Mineral Resources and Related Manufacturing District 9 nT"'; i~O ~ Pf..c~-':~i _Of ~\ -= Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Project Description rendered the terms of the existing Chapter 17.06 superfluous and unnecessary. Chapter 17.61 more thoroughly outlines the application process and the regulations regarding treatment and extraction of natural resources within City limits. The purpose of this text amendment is to clarify inconsistencies in the LEMC. Other entitlements required as part of the proposed project include a General Plan Amendment (GPA) and PreZone. D. Analysis Under CEQA While the annexation of these parcels lays the foundation for future development, no development plans are included with the annexation, text amendments, GPA, or Prezone. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s8g-acre proposed annexation. Any further evaluation of impacts of the annexation would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that all applicable studies, i.e. biological, geotechnical, air quality, hydrology, and others be included as part of the environmental assessment process. Any impacts and mitigation related to environmental impacts would be identified and mitigated as required by CEQA. For all future development proposals the City would invite review and comments by the Regulatory Agencies and the public, including landowners within and around the annexation boundary. In addition, two (2) text amendments are being proposed for the purposes of clarifying and making consistent two ordinances in the LEMC. These text amendments will only be evaluated in the checklist below where applicable. E. Public Outreach The City held a public outreach meeting on June 28, 2007 for the purposes of informing those within and adjacent to the proposed project area that an annexation is being processed. No issues related to potential environmental impacts were raised at this meeting. 10 AGEr~~)I\ tTE::r}l r~o. Pt'\CE 3') OF ~ ~, Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Checklist Form III. Initial Study / Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: Running Deer Annexation 2. Lead Agency Name, Address, and Phone Number: City of Lake Elsinore Planning Department 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore CA 92530 (951) 674-3124 3. Contact Person and Title: Wendy Worthey, Principal Environmental Planner 4. Project Location: The proposed annexation includes the land north of the existing boundary of the City of Lake Elsinore, south of Annexation No. 72 (Pacific Clay Annexation), east of Cleveland National Forest, and west of Lake Street located in unincorporated Riverside County. 5. Project Sponsor Name(s) and Address(es): City of Lake Elsinore Planning Department 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 (951) 674-3124 6. Existing General Plan Designation: Refer to Table 1 above in Section II.C. Project Description 7. Zoning: Refer to Table 1 above in Section II.C. Project Description 8. Project Description: Refer to Section II Project Description above. 11 C-"f) ~ AGEi~Di-\ . r~' '- ~ \ Pf\Gr;_~ 4_)f - Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Checklist Form 9. Surrounding Land Uses The Pacific Clay Company has active mineral (clay and gravel) extraction, rock crushing, and brick and pottery fabrication off site to the north of the proposed annexation. To the west is the Cleveland National Forest, which consists of rugged open space. To the south is a mixture of developed residential and open space within the City of Lake Elsinore. To the east is Lake Street and residential development. 10. Other Required Approvals and Involved Agencies: Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission 11. Incorporation by Reference: As permitted in Section 15150 of the CEQA Guidelines, environmental documents can incorporate by reference all or portions of other documents that are a matter of public record. The information presented in this document is based upon other environmental documents. Information and data from the following documents are incorporated by reference: General Plan EIR; City of Lake Elsinore, 1991 This document is available for review at the Lake Elsinore City Hall; 130 South Main Street: Lake Elsinore, California 92530; Phone: (951) 674- 3124. 12. Potentially Significant Impacts: D Land Use and Planning D Transportation/ Circulation D Geology D Hydrology D Air Quality D Noise D Biology D Aesthetics D Light and Glare D Energy/Mineral Resources D Cultural Resources D Public Services/Utilities 12 ACENDA ITH..l NO. ~ PACE3 S _OF 8\ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Checklist Form 13. Determination: o D D 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 shall be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will NOT be significant effects in this case because proposed mitigation measures reduce effects to insignificant levels. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION shall be prepared. I find that the proposed project COULD have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT shall be prepared. September 4, 2007 Wendy Worthey, Principal Environmental Planner Name and Title Date 13 AGENDi\ i rt:t\~ 1;10. b PACE~)~_OF ~ \ e - o ~ - '" :?ai C"l QJ .c U -; - = QJ e = o - .;: = ~ = .S: - ~ - ~ ~ = QJ .S: Q - QJ ~ > :.< .- QJ- = ~ = e.lI <~ I........ QJ ..... QJ"O Q = e.lI- =00 -a -; =:= = .- a::.: .... y ~ =- e ~ o Z ;~.... ..s=yY E-o~! ~... S ~ ~ ~~ ~c;j -= ~ = y 0 ~... "tl ... .... Q,) c~.... ~bO~ ....,cl ,.. ~... g b~ ~ -;~o ',cl ~ y =~~ ~;;J o ~ ;;.,.... :;;t ',cl y ~ =$ ~ ~ ~~ 0... ~~ ~ ... = ; - ~ Q,) ~ ;;J "tl C :3 ,.; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ = o ',cl ~ "3 y ,.. ... u - = o ',cl ~ t o =- ~ ; ~ N = C\-. C\l d '1:: C"-. ...... ...... en 0) ~ ~ O)~~ "0 ::l .~ C) 0) ~ ...... C\l Q. '8 ~I-< bO C\ll~' 11:)~ = 0) ......:,J ;.a = '(3 C;; G ::l 0 C\l bO'..... c::l ......0,=.0 ~ .S ~ ~'-2 S ~ o ~ ~b!:o::l"tl ',p ~ C) = Q. 0 ~ ~~ C\l;..;;;lQ.8~ ~...... I-< I-< ::l ::l !:; = C\l ~ 0 C\l en ...... ...... 0...e:l"O en 0, ~ en C) C) = a ~ 0)...... ::l!E I-< bO N C).~.~ -:: C\l o ...... C\l C) ~ '0 ~ I-< ~ ~.s:: ~ 0 Q..S -;:; .~ "0 I-< C) I-< "0 "0 'CiJ .t:ls~=oO).E1-< 0) 1-<~0)15.C)0 ~ 8 0) I-< ...... 0 = .:' .;:: """'1:: O)'fjJ "0...... ~ .s:: en I-< S = C\l =~ 8 ~"8~0)0.s::00 - ............ ...... ,..0 = gg ...... ~ ='1::' 1;l I-< ...... C\l.;!3 C\l 0) ;s. 1::: 0) ~.s::~ S].t12 ~ O)pC)O)q;;,t+::tt~ ~~:.c~ f;l = =:;:r = C\l I-< = = 0 ~ C\l _ooo_-u......~ cd,.ci d.-d cU ...... ~~ en ~ .~ C"-. -1""4 .~ t) ('\.. .'E '0 .~ en >< ~Q.8 ~ 0) .S 2; i:i ::l ~ P = 0) _ - ...... ...... o ~.s:: 'en .:: 0 2; NC\l-;:;~..:;l~......= 2; "a 0) ::l blJ = 5...... _;>"O=OdS = C\l 0 =.......,p !:; I-< .~ -= 0= C\l 2; ~ ~ 0 1;l 0)...... ~.o 0) = 0) 8.S"tl........sg.~s 01. =.......fjJ.~ I-< 0 ...... 0 "0 = 0) I-< C\l C) ~ I-<.~ 0 = 0 _ = ~ .~ .~ ~ ~ ~ .@ .~ ..:;l 0) -:s .,p.tl ~ ~ ..9 ~~'I::'.;!3..-l 0~.C\l _...o;s.><Xen-bO C\l C\l en 0) 0) 0) 0) = 11:) ~ .~ -:s .s .:: .s ;e = ~ C)'I::"I::' C\l ::l O)Q.=;s.;s.I-<~_ o C\l ~ 0) ~ E';: g .s:: ..c C\l 0-;::::.0 ::l.......- ...... +:l ~ ~...... C) "0 ... ~ .~ .~ .0 ~ ~.~ 2;.f'.-!:: "tl"tl"Od"dC\l......== ...... ...... 0) !:; !:; ...... Q.::l ::l t+::t+::-eogc):::lSS = = 0 C) 0) ~ d d o 0 "0 0) 0)::e.;!3 !:; !:; UUC\lP=lP=l<Qgg cd...o d.-d cu...... ~ ~~ ~ ~ as C) = 0) "0 ...... en ...0 ::l en ~ o - o Q,) ~ M tfJ~ ~li3 = I-< C\l 0 -Bbi' E's Q.~ ~ ~ bO ~ o = bO Q.o = c\-. .s ',p ;..;;;l en bO C\l C\l ~ = ~ ~ .s ;e~ "0 C\l ::l0) = ~ ] s 5 ~ _1""4 0 I-< .~ C\-. en-~ bO f!'en......en C) ~ ~ ~ = 's .g 0 Q..~ en I-< t+:: s.~ .~ C\-. 0 'sa ...... "0 c\-. en . C) .... en = en ~ ~ 'd S r;::l 0 ...... enO)'=.' OC)C) 0) ~Ol-<oenO)~ I-< ='0 1-<- '::' .so 0) en 0...0 S Q.',p bi: 0) C) .s ...... ::l C) O):-E...... en = 1-<C\l::l_bO=o ...... ~ -\2 ~,.9 ::l...... :3 ::l...... = 0 "0 ~ ~S":5j~~~ cd ,.cid-d cU ~ t> ... -; ::I 01 ,.. Q,) ~ ~ o - o ~ ~ of ~ 0) "O1;l = I-< C\l 0) ';:l.s:: I-< 0) ...... 0) ~ I-< 1;l I-< 0 ~oen- ~ ~f 8 =~~ o C\l ...... ',p ~ & C).s:: 0) ~enbO ...... 0) C\l "O~ = 2; I-<'CiJ o I-< ~~ 0)0)"O;p ~ = - 0 ::l'1:: ~ = gC\l1;l2 I-< S I-< 0) o I-< = C) _ 0) 0 C\l .e3 .s ',p 't: 5'~ E'f;l 1-<=0...... ~ ......JS 0 C)cnC\l-= =...... = ::l ...... 5...... 0 ~ S ~S = 0) = C\l C\l6C\l"O .s::d.s::= U!:;UC\l cd ,.ci ~ AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE ') l ~ '<:t ...... c\-. en = I-< 0) ...... ...... 8- "0 o o t+:: ...... o ~ o t+:: "0 = C\l 0) ~ ::l o C) o ...... en = .~ ...... C\l I-< 0) ...... ~ d ~ OF ~\ 0)- .s:: C) ...... 0) en t Cd =- e ~ 1-1 0 Z e - .... c:::> ; ;.... r-. .... ..c:~~ '" ~ ~f+:: ~ CJ ~... e ~ ~ ~I-I -= U ~C:i5 -; .... = ~ .... e = = Cd = c:::> ~ 0 - f+:: .,e "0 .;: ... Cd ~ = ~bIl~ ~ ....,e '"' ~... e b~ -;~o .,e ~ ~ =~ = =1-1 ~~ 0 =- ~.... =;;t .,e ~ Cd =$ ~ ~ ~I-I 0... =-~ = .52 .... ~ - ~ c:; = ~ c:::>Q ;:: OJ ~ > il<i .- ~.... = ~ = Of) <z --.. ~ >. ~~ Q = Of).... =rJ1 '= -; =-:: = .- ~.s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,...., "0 ~ E .,e = o ~ - u ...... <I)~ ... 15 :g g5 0........... p. en <I)<I)~ t)23 o~ ... "8 ~ ~ ~~ ~~B S:::E ~ ~ s::: o...c: ...... C1:l ~...... >. .S 0 <I) C1:l 0""'0 di s::: ....."'C,..c ~u~ - ...c: ~"'C...a>~ ~~... ...en... ,..c "'C ... ~ 0 ~ d.S ..... ~ r.:;;g _.8 -3 ~ <I)...... ~ s::; ~ C'- "'C 0.......... '+-4 - '~C1:l ..... S 0 E 0 d vi s::: ...::l .S ~ B '1; - ~ ......;..::: <I) ~ s::; s::: ::l...c: sr .......... .~ ~ -.... S <I) 0 0 .....'~ - - - <I) 20:e ...... ~ ~.~ 6l: ~ ~ ~~ ~ .~en ~ C1:lS:::::l"'C~u","""...c: 00... C1:l s:::-:::.....~den~O:~~ ...S:::o <I) ~ ...... ....... s::; "'C !::" <I) <I) s::: ...c: I:: ~ ...c: ...,..c 0 ~"'C s::: 0 ~ ~ 0 ..... ~ ..... .s o 00 s:::~...... S:::.$ ~ ... 0...... 0 ~ 'f:: 0 r..::~ ~r.S <I)"g C1:l S'S ~;.::: 'S. ;.:::..... ~ ~ 1:: ~ ~"g ~"B en~ o.S 0 ~ ~ 2. ~ .g ~ <I) > C1:l"B ><.S 8 ~ S tt::: 0< ~ .... s::: ~ 15' ~ ~ ..... 0 ,... en ...... ..... ... s...... ...... _ <I) .::: "'C en~"t:: <I) S 0 ~ s::: <I)... ~ 0 p.~ u~~E~~88C1:l~ ~.s~ s::: s~ ..s :!:f -0 C1:l 0.S:l .......e..;j ~ 00 ~ en,..c 0 ..... "'~en-:::~~ u"'C::l "'CS'" ~ <I)... 2 ..... .en..... __.... ~ <I)...... !l.l s::: P s::: ::l u 'a 0 v, .... ...... "'C - - .... ~ d .E ~::: oo<"'Co...c:p.......;e::l...c: ....-s::;.... _;:; ] E ~ ~ P. ~"'C u 8 ..... 8 ~ 0 <I) C'-. p....... ..... C'-. ...... ..... ~ ... s::: s::: C1:l ~ 00'" ~ 00 ~ ~ ... en...... "'C s::: "'C <I) C1:l ::l ~.S C1:l "'C s::: 0 s::: s::: en ~.:!:l 0 0 ...... s::: 00 ~ -::: C1:l t) en s::: s:::...... en 0 ...... 15 ..... ~ '.;j]- <I) ~ <l)C1:l..."'~~>I::-:::C1:l0<l)s:::~<I)ds:::<I)s::: ... 00- C1:l - - ~ .... en'.;j ~n 0 C1:l 00 s::; C1:l...... ::l en ........c: u <I) d ..... .<1) - C1:l ~'.;j > s:::...... -::: .~ .s ::l en C1:l ~ ~ i;j i3 p. E en f:: C1:l... ...... C1:l C1:l C1:l .... .. en en O...c: ...c: ......... ::l S 0 s::: '5 ~ ~ ~;g ~...c:"B ~ '.;j ,..c ~ ~ u UoQen~~gs:::S~~C1:l<l)~~p.~~~~~ .-d <l.i ....... bO...c: ....; ~ ...... .s o ,..c ... <I) j 2 C1:l s::: ...... .e- ... -; =' 01 '"' ~ ~ ~ o - o ~ -1- ... <I) ..... C1:l ~ <I) u i3 ::l en ...... o ..... s::: = o S C1:l ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ 1--1-- 1--1-- 1--1-- t-- I-- .e- ... -; =' 01 '"' < l6 00 C'-. s::: <I) ...... ..... ~ C1:l '>< S Q) ~ s::: ... C1:l 0 .s <I)~ <I) ... ..... C'-. = = en..... ,..c ES 'S .s ~ ~ s::: ::l 15 Qj g C'-.:::::: <I) > ... 8 8.....~ ~ O'.;j 0 ~ ~ "'C.$ ..... ::l C'-. .0..... "'0 en..... en ~.s: s.~ s s::: ~>~0"8 ~ ......'!::Q;s<I) C'-'~ en ~ U....r_ ~ <I) 0::l~S:::,..c -en ;..:::tT<I)<I)~ ~o ~ .~.~ ~ 0 ~ ~ o<C1:l.-:::>'.;j enO;:::: >. "'C sg 0 ~ '0 0 S:::~<I)S;E s:::~ C1:luen...o <I)~ <I).:g <I)...... ~ en <I) .....oenC1:l~~C1:len .$ ~ ~ ... C1:l." ~ ~ .S ;: >< ~ ~ ZO ~ >< >O~<J.;U .....~ cod .!:ic.l.-d..ccod.!:i ~ ~ tr) - ~ o - o ... = r:.:. C'-. ...... ~ o ...... ..... 23 'S .s ::l ;g S ...c: S 0.0 g s::: _ ;e S .E C'-: .8 u u C1:l .S ~ s::: ~ en~ ... ~ "'C 0 -1""'4 J..4 (I) ~ :.0 .:!:l ~en~ <I) <il p. ... S en S ......15 s::: ~ ~ ~ en~ 6b a3 ti 'en ... <I) <I) -ssg"'C ......... >. o ^~ ......c: C1:l <I) en u 00 t+:: ..9 s::: en..... C1:l..... u "'CS:::~ ~.a~ cod ,.ci AGENDA ITEM NO. '3 PAGE -; ~ 5: D \ --_.."",,-<,.,..~- 8 - o r.o. .... '" ~ u ~ ..c U -; .... = ~ 8 = o - .;: = ~ = .Sl .... ~ - ell U = ~ .Sl Q ~ ~ i"i .- ~= = tlJI <z --- ~ .... Q~ "0 = ~~ '= -; =;0: = .- ~.s ;~t ...c:u= ~t1:P:: ~.... e 3~~ ..... ; = u 0 1+::.... "t:I ......... ~ ~~~ .....J:l ~ ~.... 0 ,Q~ c. -;~~ .J:l ~ u = -a ~ ~::J o ~ >>..... :;;t .J:l U = =$ ~ ~ ~~ 0.... ~~ ..... U = ~ e ~ o Z ~ ~ ~. en l-< o 'i:l '6 o (,) ~ o .- ..... ~ 51: 's ~~ 1--1-- 1--1-- -- -- ~ U .J:l ~ oS ~ ~ a3 ~ ~ ~ ...c:: :g~ ...c: (,) .~~ ~ Q) ~.~ 00..... l-< Q) 0{3 is ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ 'S: = ~ .~..o S ~ ~ "t:I (,) Q) c:: 00 ~ = ~ ~ t) Q) ~~ .a ~ .... Q) ~ ~ ~ - - I-- I-- ~. Q) l-< ~ b1: 'i:l ~ ~ ..... ...c:: :g - ~ ~ ~ "'"" "t:I ~ ;::l = .... = o U ~ 'i:l ~ ~ ';:l ~ ...... o ~ o .- t) ::l 'i:l ~ bll ~ ;.a ::l - (,) l-< = 0 ~ ca ~ ~ .,!:: 9:2 ..0 ~ ~ .- ...c:: 'i:l 'i:l ~ = .- ~ ::a ';:l__ ~~.~ t)~t) ~~~ cJ --d e<i,.ci 0\ e<i bJj = .... ~ ;::l o =: "t:I ; = o .J:l = "S ~ o ~ o ~ = ~ .S .S ..... 00 .::l ::l ::l 0 0.. ...c:: 8. S Q) ca -:S ~ g ~ "8 "";: l-< ~ o ;.a ~ ~ ~ ;> = ~ :::::: o ~ ~ 'bb = 'El ~ ~ ~ _ = 00 ~ .- Q) 'El ..s ~ lB ~ .S 0000 'i:l 6h ::l Q) 0 Q) ca ...c:: ~ -.0 ~ Q) ~ .- -t'~. tE .~ .~ ~ -g ~ ~ ~.S 00 ';:l Q) :it)~~~ S .~ .g .!:: e ::l g ~].;!l C) .... ...... ._ Q e<i ..ci cJ ~ o - o .... =:l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (,) 'C o ..... en .- ...c:: l-< o ~~ ~. (,) en .- Q) g,o .E~. _ ~oo o i> Q) ~ ca ~ ~ l-< 'i:l ~ .s ~ - :i (,) 13 (,) ~ ebb .~ ~ o ~ 0 a ...c:: 00 -= tl 5 o Q)':;j Q) e.~ ca C'-. .;:: Q) 0..00~l-< ..c~::lt) ;.... ~ ~...... ::l ::l (,) l-< tE 0 ~Q) tE ._ 00 Q) Q~ ~ e<i ,.ci cJ ~~~ ~ ~ .J:l .... S ;:;J "t:I ; ~ ~ U .E ~ ~ U .... ~ ~ M ~ ~. ~. 8 ~.- 0..... ',i:j ~ (,)..... Q) 0 o~~ ~Q)- .... (,) 0 Q)'_ 0 .!:: '0"5 ~~CIl e<i..ci cJ AGENDA lTE\'.i r,~o. Po.,"r 2 ~ -,-"('~.\.~ 1: ? 1.0 ........ ~ ~\ ~ -= ~. Q) 00 'El ~ 'i:l lE ...c:: ~ ~. Q) ..... N ~ .S ~ ~ ~ l-< (,) p,0 ~ :E ~0;E ~ ~ ._ Q) Q) ...c:: ~tE .; ~ :s~~ ~'-El ~ ~ ~ .S ~ o O.S S g ~ ;:en ~ .8 ~ ~8 0 i> ~ 5 ] ",. ~ -; Q)OO ......g~:s ~ 'i:l~ o~o U .s ~ ~ .8 ~ ~ ~ ~ o~ :;:: l-< l-< 0 "t:I~~ ~.s~2 = {3~ ~~e. ~ = .~ ~ ~ 0 2 -; ~ =""Q)Q)15. == ~ t) 0 l-<...c::..c Q) .d ~tE~~.....'i:l~,,=, = ~Q)~Q):i;:; ~ ~ oen~OOo~ Co) C);:;JS.s~~ ..; ~ ~ e<i..ci cJ --d ~ or: 8 '- o ~ .... .~ :::;;: CJ ~ .c U '; .... I: ~ 8 I: o l- .;: I: ~ I: .S: .... = '- = ;j I: ~ o~ ;: ~ ~ .:: ~= I: ~ <~ '--- ~ >. ~'t:l ~ = ~ii) '= '; =:0 = .- ~.s ;~~ E5~! rIJ.... e ~ 3~~ = = = CJ 0 q:: .I""! "'0 .... ~ Q,I Qb.O~ .....+:l ~ (/.).... g ~::s ~ ";rlJo .+:l rIJ CJ ....! = ...=~ ~::J o ~ ;>.~ :;;t .+:l CJ = =$ ~ ~ Q~ 0.... ~(/.) t = ~ ~ o Z ~~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1'""\ "'0 Q,I ::s = .... = o CJ '-' rIJ Q,I .... ~ .... - .+:l o "'0 ; .... Q) oS = d 001'< "'I:l ...... .... = 'S .s ctl ..0 00 ~ .~ ] ~ ;e 00 .... 1:: "g .s Q) 0 00 S .... "'I:l ...... C"-. ~ = ctl -0'::: ctl Q) "'I:l S l:l l:l::l Q) "'I:l = c:l "'I:l = g = "'I:l ctl I >- ...... Q) ..Q I.~ ul ~ gj ~ Cil ~ Q) t C"-. g. g'E.g = 00 00 .... Q) ~ ...... S .... Q) 00 ~ b()C"-' Q) ~ C"-. ~ C"-. .;:l _ =CI)Q) ......ctl <I.l~"::i- ctl ...... ~!> ~ w '" ...... "Cl ',p ~;> = 00 ~ = ::l;"::: 00_ ctlSO~~ Q) -...... = ctl .......... ".. d ~ ~ 0 = ~ 0 C1)~ I'< .=..... ~ .......... .0..... .................. 0 ~ = ~CI)"ClQ)Q).... =~ c;j ~ 13 b() ~.... Q) ~...... Q) o = ctl...... ~ ~ 0 ...... =:~ :> ...... 0 b1 = .... C"-. .... Q) gj ctl 13 g ~',p ~Cil 8 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ ~~ .... ~i3Q)....I'<c;j1i3""="'I:l""" Q) ~ .... ~ .8 S ~ ...... ~......;..:::.S.S oS ~ a:l 0 ctl r~ Q b Q) !:! 0 ~ !:! 0 .........P-.z'oJ....:lCl)tI.lOtl.l""""'I:l "Ci <1.i..... bi.s:l ..... .,..: ~ ....; S r--- ....... C"-. t) ,.:!3 ...... ..0 ctl '1:: S ctl 0000...... ~g;::::l otl:l ...... ~ 00 ...... _ .~ = .... t; 25 ~ ~ .... .,!. .s 0 c;j .............. 0 t) =..Q ~ 00 ::l ~ ~ S 0 c;j .S ..0 Q) c;j .::: t) C":~"3;..:::~SCI) C1)S::l ~-2 ~ ~ g. ~ ~ '8 '8 Q) = "'I:l ;> '+-< ctl..o '" ...... I'< ctl'l:: ~ 8 :~ !j ~ .... Q) - = ::l .... Q) .::: 'S: "'I:l ~ ~ ~...d~Q)=0~ 'tJ== Q)Q) "Cl +J ;..::: ~ Q) .......... ctl Q)...... C"-. ~ .= o ~::E ~ oS ~.S?, .s S ~ ~ "::i 11 ...... ::l.~.... - ctl .... ctl...... w...... c;j"'l:l;>'+:l~~S c;jQ)......!:!1::.... ...... Q).... ~::l "'I:l ...... ',p"'i' ctl Q) Q) 0 1::.... 0,.:!3"'1:l Q) o~ = ~oS"'I:l S...... Q) >'..0 Q) Q) ~ 00 l". Q) = 00'00 .... a:l ......;::::l 00 :> .... .." Q) 0 ......0 0 ...... = 0"" .... o ctl...... Q) ~ ""'-...... - ~ 0 ...... ~...... ...... - .0 = ~ 00 ~...... ctl ~ ..... "'I:l Q) 1:: ctl b()......,g S:.E Q) 0 ~ "- !> Q) ..0 ctl Q).S = = ctl Q)..o ~ S,..!::; = 00 ............ 00 = ::l Q) ~ .......... ~...... Q) Q) .... ~ 15 ~'c;j S .... Q) a ~ .s Q).~ ~ ~ ctl::l~tiSo1::t)ctl~~~ctl"'l:l ..0 ~ C1)~ ::l 0 Q) ctl >-..0 :>..0 "3..0 ctl t) 1:: .~ ~.:: ~ t; 8 t) "g t) S t) 3 .~ ~ Q) Q) ~ ctl ~ ti .~.~ .~ B .~ 1:: o I'< ~ 00 I'< d...... 0"Cl 0 0 ctl .... = 00 !>...... t; 1'<..0.... .... ...... .... ...... ~ 0 Q) ;> = ...... ctl ~ Q) ~::l ~ 00 Q) ....:t::.Q ctl Q) Q)...... Q) oS Q)..c Q).g oS .~ :e ~ t) gf ~ E oS .s oS '"Cf oS 00 ~ ~ Q) ~ g. 1:: !:!'s @ ~,.:!3 ~.~ ~ ~ g o Q) .... .... ctl Q)...... c;j 0 ctl 0 S 0 ctl Q) ..t ~ oS 0"Cl "aoS Q) U ~ g ~ ;..::: ~ ~ 0. ~ctl ..c ~ "'I:l Q,I CJ ; CJ q:: .~ .... (/.) ~ o III b.O = ;e = .... ~ ~ o ~ "'0 = = ::s AGENDA m:::,~ NO. ~ PACE~O)F ~ \ III Q,I CJ .f Q,I (/.) CJ .... - ~ M ~ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis F. Environmental Analysis 1. Land Use Planning a. Conflict with General Plan or Zoning Less than Significant - The City of Lake Elsinore ( City) is currently performing a General Plan Update. Annexation of these parcels does not impact the existing General Plan or draft General Plan Update, as the properties in the annexation are within the Sphere of Influence and included in the General Plan and draft General Plan Update. The parcels must be pre- zoned by City Council, and an annexation application must be submitted to Riverside LAFCO as a condition of the Pacific Clay annexation. See Section II. C. Project Description for details regarding existing and proposed land uses and zoning, and LEMC text amendments. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire sSg-acre proposed annexation. Should any development be proposed in the future, the City would require consistency with the General Plan land use and zoning designations at that time. Impacts are considered less than significant. b. Conflicts with Environmental Plans or Policies No Impacts - The City participates in the Riverside County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) through use of the LEAP (Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process). The annexation action does not authorize the disturbance of land and therefore would not impact any covered species or habitat. Future development will be reviewed for specific impacts on the land and will require completion of biological studies. No impacts to any established environmental plans or policies are anticipated due to the annexation or LEMC text amendments. The area proposed for annexation does lie within MSHCP Criteria Cells and all future development would be required to undergo a joint project review with the Regional Conservation Authority. c. Compatibility with Onsite Land Uses Less Than Significant - There is no development plan at this time included as part of the proposed annexation. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be expected to impact onsite land uses when considering its minor contribution to the entire sSg-acre proposed annexation. The City would require that any future development plans be consistent with existing land uses and zoning at that time. Further, approval of the two (2) proposed text amendments would result in minor revisions to ordinances in the LEMC thus ensuring compatibility with on site land uses. Less than significant impacts would be expected. 18 AGENDA ITEM i~O. P,~CE 4 \ ~ OF ~\ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis d. Compatibility with Neighborhood Land Uses Less than Significant - The Pacific Clay Company has active mineral (clay and gravel) extraction, rock crushing, and brick and pottery fabrication offsite to the north of the proposed annexation. To the west is the Cleveland National Forest, which consists of rugged open space. To the south is a mixture of developed residential and open space within the City of Lake Elsinore. To the east is Lake Street and residential development. There is no development plan at this time included as part of the proposed annexation. The increase in 43 D U resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be expected to impact neighboring land uses when considering its minor contribution to the entire s89-acre proposed annexation. The City would require that any future development plans be consistent with neighboring land uses and zoning at that time. Further, approval of the two (2) proposed text amendments would result in minor revisions to ordinances in the LEMC thus ensuring compatibility with neighbohood land uses. Impacts would be considered less than significant. e. Affect Agriculture No Impacts - There are no designated agricultural uses within any of the parcels proposed for annexation nor are there any agricultural overlays covering these parcels. No impacts to agricultural land would be expected. f. Disrupt Established Community Less than Significant - The area consists of scattered residences in a rural setting, including areas of open space. There is no development plan at this time included as part of the proposed annexation. Neither the proposed annexation nor approval of the text amendments would disrupt an established community. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be expected to disrupt the rural communities in the area considering its minor contribution to the entire s89-acre proposed annexation. The City would require that any future development plans be consistent with neighboring land uses and zoning at that time. The residences within and adjacent to the proposed annexation were invited to attend a public outreach meeting held June 28, 2007. Further, they will be invited to comment on this document, as well as any CEQA documents required as part of future development projects. Impacts would be considered less than significant. 2. Transportation / Circulation a. Increase Trips or Congestion Less Than Significant - While the existing County land uses and 19 AGENDAI~M~O. 1> \ PACE ~ _OF ~ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis zoning are comparable to the City's land use and zoning proposed as part of this annexation, the change from the County's RR designation to the City's VLD designation would result in an increase of 43 DU over existing conditions. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not result in a substantial increase in population when considering its minor contribution to the entire s8g-acre proposed annexation. Therefore, approval of the annexation would not result in a substantial increase in traffic trips or congestion, nor would it affect the existing Levels of Service in the area. There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require a traffic impact analysis as part of the environmental assessment process, and any impacts and mitigation related to traffic would be identified as required per CEQA. Traffic impacts resulting from the project as proposed would be considered less than significant. b. Safety Hazards No Impacts - There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require a traffic impact analysis, including an evaluation of safety hazards, as part of the environmental assessment process. Any impacts and mitigation related to traffic safety hazards would be identified as required per CEQA. There are no anticipated traffic safety hazards resulting from the project as proposed. c. Access No Impacts - There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require a traffic impact analysis, including an evaluation of access as part of the environmental assessment process. Any impacts and mitigation related to access would be identified as required per CEQA. There are no anticipated traffic access issues resulting from the projects as proposed. d. Parking No Impacts - There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require a traffic impact analysis, including an evaluation of adequate parking as part of the environmental assessment process. Any impacts and mitigation related to parking would be identified as required per CEQA and City ordinances. There are no anticipated parking issues resulting 20 AGENDA ITEM NO. <6 _ PACE 43 _ OF 3 \ _ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis from the project as proposed. e. Conflict with Alternative Transportation Policies No Impacts - There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. However, the changes in allowable densities resulting from the changes from County to City land uses would result in an additional 43 DU. The increase in 43 DU would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s89-acre proposed annexation. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require a traffic impact analysis, including an assurance that there would be no conflict with alternative transportation policies. Any mitigation necessary to ensure that there would be no conflicts would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated conflicts resulting from the project as proposed. f. Rail, Waterborne, or Air Traffic Impacts No Impacts - There are no rail, waterborne, or air traffic facilities within or in the vicinity of the parcels proposed for annexation. Therefore, these issue areas are outside the scope of this project. No impacts are expected. 3. Geology a. Seismic Hazards No Impacts - The City and surrounding areas are occasionally subject to seismic ground-shaking. There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that a geotechnical and faults study be included as part of the environmental assessment process. Further, any additional DUs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and design requirements as any other proposed development. Any impacts and mitigation related to seismic hazards would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated seismic issues resulting from the project as proposed. b. Unique Geologic Features No Impacts - The proposed project site does not appear to encompass any unique geologic features. Further, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that a geotechnical study be included as part of 21 AGEN~:GI~'''l~t ~ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis the environmental assessment process. Any impacts and mitigation related to unique geologic features would be identified as required per CEQA. There are no anticipated issues resulting from the project as proposed. c. Landslides or Mudflows No Impacts - With any project located within a site encompassing hills or mountainous areas, there is a potential for landslides or mudflows. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that a geotechnical study be included as part of the environmental assessment process. Further, any additional DUs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and design requirements as any other proposed development. Any impacts and mitigation related to landslides or mudflows would be identified as required per CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to landslides or mudflows resulting from the project as proposed. d. Geologic or Soils Impacts No Impacts - There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any evaluation of soils impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that a geotechnical and soils study be included as part of the environmental assessment process. Further, any additional DUs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and design requirements as any other proposed development. Any impacts and mitigation related to seismic hazards would be identified as required per CEQA. There are no anticipated soils impacts resulting from the project as proposed. e. Erosion Impacts No Impacts - There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any evaluation of erosion impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that a geotechnical study be included as part of the environmental assessment process. In addition, the future development project would require compliance with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulations, including use of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce or avoid the potential for erosion. Further, any additional DUs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and requirements as any other proposed development. There are no anticipated erosion impacts resulting from the project as proposed. 22 ACE~'DA ,,,,",;:,,,, ~}n .t2 \': j L.;~.'1 8'y; '-'. () PACE '4 5 o~"r- Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis 4. Hydrology /Water Quality a. Drainage Changes No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for changes in drainage patterns and other hydrologic features. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that a hydrology study and drainage plan be included as part of the environmental assessment process. Further, any additional DDs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and requirements as any other proposed development. Any impacts and mitigation related to drainage and other hydrologic features would be identified as required per CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to drainage or other hydrologic features resulting from the project as proposed. b. Changes to Absorption Rates No Impacts - See discussion in 4.a. above. c. Flood Course Alteration No Impacts - See discussion in 4.a. above. d. Surface Water No Impacts - See discussion in 4.a. above. e. Water Quality No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for impacts to water quality and beneficial uses due to increased urbanization as well as potential impacts from erosion and sedimentation. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that a water quality management plan be prepared as part of the environmental assessment process. Any impacts to water quality and beneficial uses as well as required mitigation would be identified as required per CEQA. The applicant would also be required to comply with NPDES regulations, including the preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. Further, any additional DDs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and requirements as any other proposed development. There are no 23 AGENDA ITEf~ f.;'O. g PACE_ 4 b _0;: ~ \ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis anticipated Issues related to water quality resulting from the project as proposed. f. Groundwater Alteration No Impacts - See discussion in 4.a. above. g. Groundwater Quality Through Additions No Impacts - See discussion in 4.e. above. h. Groundwater Quality Through Runoff No Impacts - See discussion in 4.e. above. i. Water Reduction No Impacts - See discussion in 4.a. above. j. Flood Hazards No Impacts - See discussion in 4.a. above. 5. Air Quality a. Air Quality Violations No Impacts - While the existing County land uses and zoning are comparable to the City's land use and zoning proposed as part of this annexation, the change from the County's RR designation to the City's VLD designation would result in an increase of 43 DU over existing conditions. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not result in a substantial increase in population when considering its minor contribution to the entire s89-acre proposed annexation. Therefore, no additional effects to air quality would be expected from the proposed annexation over those already anticipated in the County General Plan or any regional Air Quality Management Plan. With any future development there would be a potential for changes in air quality resulting from construction activities and increased traffic. Currently there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that an air quality analysis be prepared as part of the environmental assessment process. Any impacts and mitigation related to air quality would be identified as required. There are no anticipated issues related to air quality resulting from the project as proposed. 24 AGENDA '''''1:','" f~"'" Q i' ~ ""'".,,~ '~v. 0 PACE 4 '( -OF-'~~-'-- -- Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis b. Sensitive Receptors No Impacts - See discussion in 5.a. above. c. Regional Air Quality No Impacts - See discussion in 5.a. above. d. Objectionable Odors No Impacts - See discussion in 5.a. above. 6. Noise a. Noise Levels No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for changes in noise levels. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that a Noise Study be prepared as part of the environmental assessment process. Further, any additional DDs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and requirements as any other proposed development. Any impacts and mitigation related to noise would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to noise resulting from the project as proposed. b. Noise Exposures No Impacts - See discussion in 6.a. above. 7. Biology a. Endangered or Threatened Species No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for effects to biological resources within and in the vicinity of the project site. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require preparation of all required biological studies as part of the environmental assessment process. In addition, all development projects in the City are required to be consistent with the MSHCP. Further, any additional DDs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies- and requirements as any other proposed development. Any future impacts and 25 ACENDA ITEM i~O. PAce-.SLor- b ~\ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis mitigation related to biological resources would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to biological resources resulting from the project as proposed. b. Natural Communities No Impacts - See discussion in 7.a. above. c. Wetland Habitat No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for affects to wetlands or other jurisdictional waters within and in the vicinity of the project site. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that any wetlands or jurisdictional waters be evaluated as part of the environmental assessment process. In addition, the MSHCP requires an analysis of any potential riverine/riparian and vernal pools on-site. Any impacts and mitigation related to these resources would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to wetlands or jurisdictional waters resulting from the project as proposed. 8. Aesthetics a. Scenic Vista or Highway No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for changes in scenic resources. However, there are no designated scenic vistas or scenic highways within or adjacent to the project area. There is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that an evaluation for scenic vistas and highways be included as part of the environmental assessment process. The increase in 43 DU over what is currently allowed by the existing County land uses would not be expected to affect any related scenic resources. Any impacts and mitigation related to scenic resources would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to aesthetics resulting from the project as proposed. b. Aesthetic Affect No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for changes in scenic resources. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City 26 ACENDA ITEM NO. PACE 4'1.. OF '~ ~\ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis could require that a visual simulation be prepared as part of the environmental assessment process. The increase in 43 DU over what is currently allowed by the existing County land uses would not be expected to affect any related scenic resources, and would be required to be included in any studies required of future development projects. Any impacts and mitigation related to aesthetics would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to aesthetics resulting from the project as proposed. 9. Light and Glare a. Light and Glare No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for additional light and glare from increased development. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the applicant would be required to comply with City design requirements as part of the environmental assessment process. Further, any additional DUs allowable as the result ofland use changes would be subject to the same requirements as any other proposed development. Any impacts and mitigation related to light and glare would be identified as required per CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to light and glare at this time. to. Population and Housing a. Exceed Population Projections No Impacts - With any approved development there is a potential for population growth. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any construction of residential or commercial development that could generate growth at this time. Further, the increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s8g-acre proposed annexation. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that all impacts related to population increases and growth be evaluated as part of the environmental assessment process. Any related impacts and mitigation would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to population and growth resulting from the project as proposed. b. Induce Substantial Growth No Impacts. See discussion in lO.a. above. 27 AGENDA ITEM ~o.~ PAGE'-:;O_Or- - Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis c. Displace Housing No Impacts - The proposed project does not include any action that could displace. housing. No development plan is included as part of this proposed annexatIon and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require that any potential displacement of housing be evaluated as part of the environmental assessment process. Any related impacts and mitigation would be identified as required by CEQA. There are no anticipated housing issues resulting from the project as proposed. 11. Energy and Mineral Resources a. Energy Conservation Plans Less than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any other use or disturbance of land. The resulting increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s89-acre proposed annexation, and would not be expected to affect any energy conservation plan. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on energy conservation. Future development will be subject to state and local requirements. Impacts are expected to be less than significant. b. Non-Renewable Energy Resources Less than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any other use or disturbance of land. The resulting increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s89-acre proposed annexation, and would not be expected to affect non-renewable energy resources. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on these resources. Future development will be subject to state and local requirements. Impacts are expected to be less than significant. c. Future Value of Resources Less Than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any other use or disturbance of land. The resulting increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s89-acre proposed annexation, and would not be expected to affect the future value of resources. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on these resources. Future development will be subject to state and local requirements. Impacts are expected to be less than significant. 28 ...,....'" 'T,"70 r'o t\GL:r~Ln.\ ~ ~ t,:,;l i'G . PACE~\ ....OF ~ ~\ - Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis d. Potential Health Hazards No Impacts - The proposed project does not approve any other use or disturbance of land. The resulting increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire sSg-acre proposed annexation, and would not be expected to result in potential health hazards. Future development will be reviewed for potential health hazards, and will be subject to federal, state and local requirements. No impacts are expected to result from the project as proposed. 12. Cultural Resources a. Paleontological, Archeological, or Historical Resources No Impacts - With any development there is a potential for effects on paleontological, archeological, or historic resources. However, there is no development plan included as part of this proposed annexation and any further evaluation of impacts at this time would be speculative at best. This annexation does not allow for any disturbance of land. Should development be proposed in the future, the City would require preparation of all required paleontological, archeological, or historic resources studies as part of the environmental assessment process. Further, any additional DUs allowable as the result of land use changes would be subject to the same studies and requirements as any other proposed development. Any impacts and mitigation related to these resources would be identified as required per CEQA. There are no anticipated issues related to cultural resources resulting from the project as proposed. b. Ethnic Cultural Values No Impacts - As discussed above in 12.a., and related to cultural resources impacts, no impacts to ethnic cultural values would be expected c. Religious or Sacred Uses No Impacts - As discussed above in 12.a., and related to cultural resources impacts, no impacts to religious or scared uses would be expected. 13. Public Services and Utilities a. Fire Protection Less than Significant - Fire protection for both the City and the County is provided by the Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD). The proposed project will not result in a jurisdiction change in service provider. The proposed annexation will not affect man-power needs, but rather funding. 29 \w. ~ PAGE sa._OF ~ \ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis Upon annexation, the City of Lake Elsinore will provide fire protection through contract with Riverside County Fire Department, and tax revenue collected by the City of Lake Elsinore will be used to provide fire protection services for the annexed area. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s89-acre proposed annexation. At this time, no development plans have been submitted as part of this project. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and fire protection. Less than significant impacts are expected. b. Police Protection Less than Significant - Police protection is provided for the both the City and County through the Riverside County Sheriffs Department. The proposed annexation does not affect man-power needs, but rather funding. The City of Lake Elsinore will provide police protection for the proposed annexation parcels through a contract with Riverside County Sheriffs Department. Tax revenue generated will provide funding for the City to provide Police Protection services through the Riverside County Sheriffs Department. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s89-acre proposed annexation. As no new development is submitted at this time as part of the proposed project, future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and police protection, and is subject to state and City codes. Less than significant impacts are expected. c. Schools Less than Significant - The City of Lake Elsinore School District provides public education services for both the City and County in their district boundaries. The impact of annexation will not affect school facilities or man- power needs, but rather funding. Tax revenue collected from the parcels in the proposed annexation will provide educational services for the annexed area. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase when considering its minor contribution to the entire s8g-acre proposed annexation. At this time, no development plans have been submitted as part of this project. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and education services, and is subject to City development impact fees. Less than significant impacts are expected. d. Recreation Less than Significant - The City of Lake Elsinore Community Services Department provides and maintains parks, various sports courts and fields. 30 t.GE1'~~~~b\~~. OF ~3 \ _ . Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis Recreation activities, such as adult education, youth sports and groups, and a skate park are also provided to residents of the City of Lake Elsinore. The impact of annexation will not affect the facilities or man-power needs, but rather funding. Tax revenue will be generated directly for the City of Lake Elsinore in order to provide parks and recreational services for residents of the City, which will include the annexed area. The increase in 43 DU resulting from the change from County to City land uses would not be a substantial increase in use of recreational facilities when considering its minor contribution to the entire s89-acre proposed annexation. At this time, no development plans have been submitted as part of this project. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and parks and recreational services, and is subject to the State of California Quimby Act and City development Quimby in-lieu fees. Less than significant impacts are expected. e. Power Less than Significant - Southern California Edison (SCE) currently provides electrical power to the proposed annexation, and the annexation will have no foreseeable effect on power within the City of Lake Elsinore. No new development plans have been submitted, and future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and power / electrical distribution and supply, including those resulting from the increase in 43 additional DU. Less than significant impacts are expected. f. Natural Gas Less than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any use that would allow the disturbance of land at this time. Southern California Gas Company (SCGC) provides natural gas service to the region. While the annexation properties currently do not receive service, the annexation of these parcels will have little effect on natural gas distribution and supply, including the increase in use resulting from the additional 43 DU. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and natural gas supply. Less than significant impacts are expected. g. Communications Systems Less than Significant - Verizon provides telecommunication service to the region and properties of the proposed annexation. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and telecommunication services, including those resulting from the increase in 43 additional DU. Less than significant impacts are expected. 31 AGE!~DJ\ ;Y:::C,J ;'JO. ~ P,c,GE_S ~ OF ~ \ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis h. Water Less than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any use that would allow the disturbance of land at this time. Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District provides water service to the region and the proposed annexation. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and municipal water service, including those resulting from the increase in 43 additional DU. Less than significant impacts are expected. i. Sewer Less than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any use that would allow the disturbance of land at this time. Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District provides sewer service to the region and the proposed annexation. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and municipal sewer service, including those resulting from the increase in 43 additional DU. Less than significant impacts are expected. j. Storm Water Drainage Less than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any use that would allow the disturbance of land at this time. Lake Elsinore Department of Public Works maintains the City's storm water collection and drainage system. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and storm drain systems, including those resulting from the increase in 43 additional DU. Less than significant impacts are expected. k. Solid Waste and Disposal Less than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any use that would allow the disturbance of land at this time. CR&R is the franchised solid waste hauler for the City of Lake Elsinore Department. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and solid waste disposal, including those resulting from the increase in 43 additional DU. Less than significant impacts are expected. 1. Maintenance Less than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any use that would allow the disturbance of land at this time. Lake Elsinore Department of Public Works maintains the City's streets, signs, lights, and signals. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public services and infrastructure maintenance, including those resulting 32 ~ A~,"..,;,.., i\ ~.;"::"~ ~;o u",ld.l."\ ! 0 ~,,; ,. . PAGE.5-~OF ~ \ Running Deer Annexation Environmental Analysis Initial Study / Negative Declaration from the increase in 43 additional DU. Less than significant impacts are expected. m. Other Governmental Services Less Than Significant - The proposed project does not approve any use that would allow the disturbance of land at this time. The City of Lake Elsinore provides other municipal services, as mentioned, streets, parks, and schools, already utilized by the properties proposed for annexation. Future development will be reviewed for its specific impacts on public all governmental services, including those resulting from the increase in 43 additional DU. Less than significant impacts are expected. 33 ~ ~\ tI.GEND,C\ lTG'.~ NO. PA?'!= L b ,.v."" Z> OF Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis 14. Mandatory Findings of Significance The following are Mandatory Findings of Significance in accordance with Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines. 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? Less Than Significant Implementation of the proposed project includes approval of an annexation and two (2) text amendments. Because there is no development plan associated with the proposed project, it will not 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. As detailed in Section 7 Biological Resources, the proposed project will not result in any significant impacts to biological resources. Additionally, as detailed in Section 12 Cultural Resources, the proposed project will not result in any impacts to historical or archaeological resources with implementation. As a result of changes from County to City land uses, there will be an allowable increase of 43 DU. However, the project footprint as it would relate to biological and cultural resource impacts would be the same with or without the additional 43 DU. Therefore, a less than' significant impact is identified. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) Less Than Significant Impact Implementation of the proposed project includes approval of an annexation and two (2) text amendments. Because there is no development plan associated with the proposed project, and based upon the analysis in the Initial Study, implementation of the proposed project would not result in impacts that are cumulatively considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of other projects. As a result of changes from County to City land uses, there will be an allowable increase of 43 DU. However, this would not be considered substantial within the overall 58g-acre project site. Therefore, a less than significant impact is identified. 34 AGENDA \TEMNO'_~'i \- PAGE.-S] _c,i'----.--. Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less Than Significant Impact Implementation of the proposed project includes approval of an annexation and two (2) text amendments. Because there is no development plan associated with the proposed project, and based upon the analysis in the Initial Study, implementation of the proposed project would not result in impacts that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. As a result of changes from County to City land uses, there will be an allowable increase of 43 DU. However, this would not be considered substantial within the overall s89-acre project site. Therefore, a less than significant impact is identified. 35 AG'CNDi\ rndJi NO.~ PAGE~ -~ Running Deer Annexation Initial Study / Draft Negative Declaration Environmental Analysis 15. Persons and Organizations Consulted Riverside County Sheriff's Department Lake Elsinore Sheriffs Station 333 Limited Avenue Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Contact: Sergeant Vincent Scarpino Riverside County Fire Department Planning Section 4080 Lemon St., 2nd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Contact: Tracey Hobday / Fire Marshal Elsinore Fire Station - Station No. 10 401 Graham Avenue Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Contact: Steve Gallegos / City Fire Chief Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District P.o. Box 3000 31315 Chaney Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Contact: Cher Quinones Riverside County Municipal Waste Management Department C R & R Incorporated 10910 Dawson Canyon Rd. Corona, CA 91719 Riverside County Transportation and Land Management Agency 4080 Lemon St., 8th Floor Riverside, CA 92501 36 '~< ',"~' "0 7\ AGd:;~~~~'5~~' OF ~ \ City of Lake Elsinore, California Running Deer Annexation DRAFT Plan of Services Table of Contents Section Figure 1 Proposed Annexation Paee 1 2 2 2 3 4 5 7 7 8 8 9 9 9 10 11 Paee 1 6 EXHIBIT \ B' 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Annexation Area 3.0 Services Required by Annexation Area 4.0 Police Protection 5.0 Fire Protection 6.0 Domestic Water Service 7.0 Domestic Sewer Service 8.0 Solid Waste Service 9.0 Electrical Service 10.0 Gas Service 11.0 Communication Services 12.0 Street Maintenance 13.0 Parks and Recreation 14.0 Landscape and Lighting 15.0 Schools 16.0 Library Fieures Figure 2 Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Boundaries The Planning Associates .. . .-JQO)/,~007 f',GE;.lL'r~ ~ ~ :::;'.~~ i~~0. PACE ~O _OF ~ 1>\ City of Lake Elsinore, California Running Deer Annexation Plan of Services DRAFT 1.0 Introduction This study and report have been prepared to provide officials of the City of Lake Elsinore, the Riverside County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCD), and other interested parties with a plan to provide municipal services and the impacts to service providers. Within this report is analysis of the fiscal impact on the local agencies responsible for providing services to the potential 589.28-acre annexation to the City of Lake Elsinore. The purpose of the application for annexation is to change the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Lake Elsinore to include the 589.28-acre corridor of unincorporated Riverside County along Running Deer Road, resulting from conditions of annexation following the 1,374-acre annexation (LAFCD 2005-81-1) to the north of the subject properties. Please refer to Figure 1. Figure 1 osed Annexation The County of Riverside and the City of Lake Elsinore currently provide all traditional municipal services to the area under consideration for annexation. Therefore, there will not be a need for extension of municipal services to the area, and the level of services provided by the City will not change, as the existing land use will remain intact. All of the property is privately owned and maintained, and will not change as a result of the annexation. The Planning Associates 1 October 11,2007 AGENDA ITE~NO. ~ PAGE_b LOF ~r City of Lake Elsinore, California Running Deer Annexation Plan of Services DRAFT 2.0 Annexation Area The proposed annexation area is comprised of a collection of privately owned parcels located within the unincorporated area of western Riverside County within the Sphere of Influence of the City of Lake Elsinore. Generally, the annexation area is located north and west of Running Deer Road and Mountain Street, bound on the west by the Cleveland Nation Forest, the north and east by LAFCO Annexation 2005-81-1, and to the south by the City of Lake Elsinore. The annexation area is approximately 589.28 acres and is located in portions of Sections 27, 28, and 29 of Township 5 South, Range 5 West. 3.0 Services Required By Annexation Area The annexation of the 589.28 acres of unincorporated Riverside County will require the extension of municipal services by the City of Lake Elsinore. The annexation area is already under the city's Sphere of Influence, and the City of Lake Elsinore is currently providing, or contracting for, municipal services for the subject area. Services not provided by the City of Lake Elsinore are due to the remote character of the subject land. There are no paved roads servicing the parcels in the proposed annexation, and no streetlights or landscaping. Additionally, no sewer or city water mains reach the proposed annexation parcels. The City of Lake Elsinore does provide services to the tenants of the project. These services include but are not limited to roads, parks, educational services, such as schools and libraries, and fire and police services. These services, as well as others, are examined in the following sections. 4.0 Police Protection Description of Level of Service: The proposed annexation properties are currently located within unincorporated Riverside County and Riverside County Sheriffs Department provides law enforcement services. Upon annexation, the City of Lake Elsinore will provide law enforcement services to the annexed properties. The City of Lake Elsinore contracts law enforcement services through the Riverside County Sheriffs Department. The current staffing level contracted by the City of Lake Elsinore is as follows: Twenty three (23) Non-sworn Code Enforcement Officers, and One hundred eighteen (118) Sworn Crime Suppression Officers. The City of Lake Elsinore currently offers a level of service of 1.2 officers per one- thousand residents. The closest police station to the proposed annexation is located at 333 Limited A venue in the City of Lake Elsinore. The annexation area is served on a dispatch basis from a patrol beat with an average urban response time of under five minutes in emergency response, The Planning Associates 2 October 11, 2007 ~ 'r"'ICI.. _ 1"\ ~....., T" ~!"'! .' ~ ""'\ AC!;;i\1Di<i ~,:.;;:,~ 1.,,,,. PAGE_6 ~.oF ~ r City of Lake Elsinore, California Running Deer Annexation Plan of Services DRAFT and eleven and one-half minutes for non-emergency calls, in the present City of Lake Elsinore boundaries. Improvements Requirements: The proposed annexation will not require further developments to the existing law enforcement service and infrastructure. The City of Lake Elsinore and the Riverside County Sheriffs Department will continue to review service to the City and the newly annexed areas to ensure adequate personnel and equipment. Time Framefor Extension of Service: The Riverside County Sheriffs Department will provide law enforcement services for the annexation area, and, upon annexation, will continue to provide law enforcement services through a contractual agreement with the City of Lake Elsinore. The City of Lake Elsinore will be financially responsible for law enforcement services, as well as first response, for the annexation area. 5.0 Fire Protection Description of Level of Service: The Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD), in coordination with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF), provides fire protection to the City of Lake Elsinore and surrounding county lands, which includes the annexation properties. Fire service is established through the Riverside County Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Aid Plan, which is based on response times, travel distance, and staffing / workload levels. Riverside County Fire Department maintains an Insurance Services Office (ISO) rating of five, operating on a regional concept whereby three or more fire engines respond to any reported fire. The Goodhew Ambulance Company provides additional medical service. Two paramedic units are available which are dispatched simultaneously with fire emergency units from Riverside County Fire Emergency Command Center. Staffing for the Emergency Command Center includes one Advanced Life Support (paramedic) available twenty-four hours a day and a second ALS unit dedicated as a 'day car', usually available only from 8:00 a.m. to I 0:00 p.m. seven days a week. The nearest fire station to the proposed annexation is McVicker Park Fire Station #85, located at 29405 Grand A venue in the City of Lake Elsinore. This station has two engines, one City Medic Engine (Engine 85), featuring paramedic services, and one Engine (Engine 285), the second roll engine, active if manned by volunteers or if main engine is down or undergoing maintenance. Under optimum conditions, this station would have minimum of one engine on scene in three to five minutes. This station is manned by three firefighters 24/7. The Planning Associates 3 Octobe~.l.l;, ~p07 1> AGENDA \ I ti,j nO'~.:itl ~ b~. 01- , PACi::_ ..- -= City of Lake Elsinore, California Running Deer Annexation Plan of Services DRAFT The next closest fire station is Sycamore Creek Fire Station #64, located on Horse Thief Canyon Road. The station has one County Engine (Engine 64) that under optimum conditions could have the engine onsite in minimum of seven minutes. Finally, there is Elsinore Fire Station #10, which has one City Medic Engine (Medic Engine 10), and two State CDF Engines (Engines 3173 and 3175), and one squad (Squad to), and has a response time of seven to ten minutes. The State CDF Engines respond to wildfires both local and across the state. Medic Engine 10 responds to calls in the City of Lake Elsinore. Squad 10 rolls on any call in the City of Lake Elsinore when manned by volunteers. This station is also manned by three fire fighters twenty-four hours. The County currently does not have an Emergency Command Center in Lake Elsinore. Improvements Requirements: The proposed annexation will not require further improvements to the eXIstmg fire fighting and medical services provided by Riverside County under contract from the City of Lake Elsinore. Time Framefor Extension of Service: As presently under contract with the County of Riverside, the Riverside County Fire Department and California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection will continue to provide fire fighting and medical services to the annexation area. Upon annexation the City will assume full responsibility, but no new extension of services is needed. 6.0 Domestic Water Service Description of Level of Service: Water service for the existing homes within the proposed annexation is provided by private wells. The Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD), a sub agency of the Western Municipal Water District (WMWD), provides service for both the Pacific Clay property to the north (Annexation 72) and the existing homes within the Lake Elsinore City Limits. EVMWD owns and operates several water transmission lines adjacent to the site. The existing water transmission lines adjacent to the proposed annexation are as follows: Street Mountain Street Running Deer Road Lincoln Street Location Off-centerline of street between Lake Street and ending past Avocado Way Off-centerline of street between Rolando Street and ending approximately 600' past Coconut Street Off-centerline of street on Lincoln Street past Dale Court Size 12" 8" 12" Existing private wells are the responsibility of the property owner. The Planning Associates 4 October 11,2007 AGENDA ITEffJ I'.h) PACE~~ r ~ ~\ City of Lake Elsinore, California Running Deer Annexation Plan of Services DRAFT Improvements Requirements: Upon annexation, water will continue to be supplied by private wells for parcels in the annexation area. However, future development, depending on quantity and density, may result in the necessary expansion of EVMWD service to the annexation area and the option of existing homes to connect to the service. These costs would be borne by the developer and the property owner. No improvements to the existing water service are necessary . Time Framefor Extension of Service: No extension of service is necessary at this time. Future development will dictate the expansion of service, and impacts to water service and supply will be evaluated at that time. Additionally, all but five parcels fall within the EVMWD service boundaries, and the EVMWD would need to annex these parcels into their service range, which can be done at a later time. Please Refer to Figure 2 on the following page. 7.0 Domestic Sewer Service Description of Level of Service: Sewer service for properties within the proposed annexation is through the use of private septic tank systems. EVMWD does not have any sanitary sewer lines located within the proposed annexation area. Sewer lines, however, are located adjacent to the properties within the proposed annexation. The existing service lines adjacent to the proposed annexation properties are as follows: Street Mountain Street Running Deer Road Rolando Road Lincoln Street Location Size Centerline of street from Palm View to approximately 150' past Avocado Street 8" Centerline of street ending approximately 600' past Coconut Street 8" Centerline of street from Antelope Street 8" Centerline of street ending at Dale Court 8" Existing private septic systems in use are the responsibility ofthe private owner. Improvements Requirements: There are no needed improvements to the annexation area's sewer service. The property owners are responsible for the maintenance of their individual septic tank system, and there will be no change in this resulting from the annexation. Future development, however, may result in the necessary expansion of EVMWD service to the annexation area and the option of existing homes to connect to the service. These costs would be borne by the developer and the property owner. The future impact of development on EVMWD sewer service shall be studied as a requirement of the development process. No improvements to the existing sewer service are necessary. The Planning Associates 5 October 11,2007 AGE~mA ~ .-:.,> [JO. ~ PACE ~ S OF ~ \ City of Lake Elsinore, California Running Deer Annexation Plan of Services DRAFT Figure 2 Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Boundaries . Existing EVMWD I WMWD Service Area . Proposed Annexation Areas withm EVMWD I WMWD Service Area . Proposed Annexation Areas outside ofEVMWD I WMWD Service Area . Cleveland National Forest Time Framefor Extension of Service: Sewer service is already provided by the property owner, thus, no extension of service is necessary. Future development will dictate the expansion of service, and impacts to sewer service and capacity shall be evaluated at that time as an integral part of the application development application process. Additionally, all but five parcels fall within the EVMWD service boundaries and the EVMWD would need to 'annex' these parcels into their service range. Please refer to Figure 2 above for a map describing the EVMWD / WMWD service area. The Planning Associates 6 AGENI9fWM~\MJ~007 ~ PAGE_lYb _Or- 'b \ City of Lake Elsinore, California Running Deer Annexation Plan of Services DRAFT 8.0 Solid Waste Service Description of Level of Service: The Riverside County Waste Resources Management District (RCWRMD) is responsible for the operation of Riverside County's landfills, with the exception of EI Sobrante Landfill, which is owned by Waste Management in cooperation with Riverside County. The waste currently generated by the properties within the proposed annexation is transported to the EI Sobrante Landfill for disposal by CR&R Inc., the franchised solid waste hauler for the City of Lake Elsinore and surrounding Riverside County. EI Sobrante Landfill is located approximately 10 miles north of the project site at 10910 Dawson Canyon Road in the City of Corona. The landfill is currently under capacity and is only authorized to accept non-hazardous solid wastes as defined in the California Administrative Code (Title 23, Subchapter 15, Article 2, Sections 2523 and 2524). Improvements Requirements: There are no needed improvements to the solid waste disposal service. CR&R currently transports solid waste for the annexation area and there will be no change resulting from annexation. Time Framefor Extension of Service: Solid waste disposal service is already provided by the City of Lake Elsinore, thus, no extension of service is necessary. 9.0 Electrical Service Description of Level of Service: Southern California Edison provides electrical servIce to the properties within the proposed annexation. Improvements Requirements: There are no needed improvements to the current electrical service provided by Southern California Edison due to the annexation of the parcels. Future development shall examine the expansion and impact to electrical supplies for the area. These costs shall be borne by the developer. Time Framefor Extension of Service: No extension of service is necessary as Southern California Edison already provides the necessary electrical service for the annexation area. The Planning Associates 7 October 11, 2007 ACENDA ITEM. NO. ~ PAGE _6 l _. c'r.~_~' _ City of Lake Elsinore, California Running Deer Annexation Plan of Services DRAFT 10.0 Gas Service Description of Level of Service: Southern California Gas Company (SCGC) provides natural gas service to the annexation area. Existing four-inch high-pressure gas mains are located along Lake Street. The existing service lines adjacent to the proposed annexation properties are as follows: Street Mountain Street Running Deer Road Antelope Street Caribou Street Bayberry Drive Redwood Drive Location Between Avocado St. and Lake St., centerline Between Rolando St. and end of Running Deer Rd., centerline Between Bayberry Dr. and end of street, centerline Between Bayberry Dr. and end of street, centerline Between Antelope St. and Caribou St., centerline Between Running Deer Rd. and Caribou St., centerline Size 4" 2" 2" 2" 2" 2" Improvements Requirements: Improvements to the current gas service infrastructure provided by Southern California Gas Company is not necessary for annexation. Future development impacts to gas service and infrastructure development shall be studied and the costs borne by the developer and Southern California Gas Company. Time Frame for Extension of Service: No extension of service is necessary as Southern California Gas Company does not currently provide gas service to the annexation area and new development is not authorized with this annexation. 11.0 Communication Service Description of Level of Service: Verizon provides telecommunication service to the annexation area. Improvements Requirements: There is no need for improvements to the level of communication service provided by Verizon. Time Framefor Extension of Service: No extension of service is necessary as Verizon already provides the necessary communication service for the annexation area. The Planning Associates 8 October 1!~ 2007 Q AGENDA ITEM 1\10. ~ PAGE~ ~ )1= 0 \ City of Lake Elsinore, California Running Deer Annexation Plan of Services DRAFT 12.0 Street Maintenance Description of Level of Service: The annexation properties are serviced by a series of improved dirt roads. These roads have been dedicated and the county has accepted them. However, these roads are not maintained by the county at this time. Improvements Requirements: No improvements are necessary the streets located within the proposed annexation. Upon annexation, the City of Lake Elsinore will maintain the roads and the roads will be placed on a list for paving and other improvements. Time Framefor Extension of Service: No immediate extension of paved city streets is necessary. However, the City of Lake Elsinore will place the roads on a list for paving improvements, and will maintain the dirt roads until improvement occurs. Future development shall be required to study impacts to the City of Lake Elsinore Public Works Department and shall bear the cost for future extension of public roads. 13.0 Parks and Recreation Description of Level of Service: Currently there are no parks in the annexation area, and no parks are planned in the immediate future. The proposed annexation properties and existing homes currently utilize City of Lake Elsinore parks. Future development shall study the impact on the City of Lake Elsinore parks and facilities. The developer shall bear the cost of impact covered by the Quimby Act fees. Improvements Requirements: No improvements are necessary at this time. Time Framefor Extension of Service: No extension of service is required. 14.0 Landscape and Lighting Description of Level of Service: The properties within the annexation are currently accessed by improved dirt roads that incorporate no landscape or lighting. The Planning Associates 9 October*1,200 .-,\~ENDA ITe:~NO.. ~ ... PAGE_Oq . __0.. City of Lake Elsinore, California Running Deer Annexation Plan of Services DRAFT Improvements Requirements: No improvements or changes are necessary with the annexation of these properties. The City of Lake Elsinore, upon annexation, will maintain the dirt roads and place them on a list of roads to be paved. Upon creation of a Lightning Maintenance District, lighting shall be provided by the City along the newly paved roads. Future development, if zoning not changed, is of very low density and would incorporate smaller streets that will not require raised medians or enhanced reverse frontage landscape treatments. Time Framefor Extension of Service: No extension of service is necessary, as the proposed annexation is serviced by improved dirt roads with no landscaping or lighting. Future development, however, shall examine impacts when additional streets are expanded into the area. The developer shall bear the cost for the study and part or all the cost for construction. Lighting will require the development of a Lighting Maintenance District (LMD) for the annexation parcels. Additionally, lighting will be extended into the annexation area once the road improvements are complete and the LMD is formed. 15.0 Schools Description of Level of Service: The Lake Elsinore Unified School District (LEUSD) provides educational services to the City of Lake Elsinore and immediate surrounding areas. The proposed annexation area is within the LEUSD boundaries and existing residences utilize the LEUSD services. The following are the schools that service the proposed annexation: School Name Rice Canyon Elementary Terra Cotta Middle School Temescal High School Street Address 29535 Westwind Drive 29291 Lake Street 28755 EI Toro Road Levels K - 5 6-8 9 - 12 Improvements Requirements: No improvements are necessary due to the proposed annexation. Required school development fees will be collected prior to the issuance of building permits on all future development. In addition, impact studies shall be performed prior to approval of future development to determine the impact on educational services provide by LEUSD. The developer shall pay both costs. Time Frame for Extension of Service: No immediate extension or upgrade of services is required with the proposed annexation. The Planning Associates 10 October 11 2007 ~ AGENDA ITE(j~ NO. PACE_~ (b _OF ~ \ City of Lake Elsinore, California Running Deer Annexation Plan of Services DRAFT 16.0 Library Description of Level of Service: The County of Riverside maintains the libraries within the City of Lake Elsinore. The libraries within the City of Lake Elsinore are as follows: Library Lake Elsinore Library Lakeside Library / Vick Knight Community Center Street Address 600 West Graham A venue 32593 Riverside Drive In addition to the two libraries listed above, there are also additional libraries in the region (Wildomar, El Cerrito, and Canyon Lake). Improvements Requirements: No improvements are necessary due to the proposed annexation. Required development fees will be collected prior to the issuance of building permits on all future development. In addition, impact studies shall be performed prior to approval of future development to determine the impact on library services. The developer shall pay both costs. Time Framefor Extension of Service: No immediate extension or upgrade of services is required with the proposed annexation. The Planning Associates 11 October 11, 2007 ~ ACEN~~~I:r~\~l ~ Running Deer Annexation - Area Map Scale ~ 0.5 0.0 fit ~ 0.5 Miles J 1.0 EXHIBIT 'e' ~ ~Ct"O -'~ ~ -or pp,.c~_ - Running Deer Annexation - Existing County Land Use .~~ City of Lake Elsinore Cleveland National Forest . Rural Mountainous (RM) - 410 Acres . Rural Residential (RR) - 143 Acres Open Space - Mineral Resources (OS-MR) - 35 AcliXHIBIT $N Scale ~ ~ 0.5 0.0 0.5 'D' Miles J 1.0 Running Deer Annexation - Existing County Zoning .~~ City of Lake Elsinore Cleveland National Forest . Residential Agriculture (R-A-IO) - 486 Acres II Residential Agriculture (R-A-2.5) - 67 Acres Mineral Resources (M-R) - 35 Acres ~ Scale 'P ~o t 0.5 Miles J 1.0 Running Deer Annexation - Proposed City GPA Land Use City of Lake Elsinore Cleveland National Forest . Mountainous (MT) - 410 Acres . Very Low Density (VLD) - 143 Acres Ij~~/)\21 Open Space (OS) - 35 Acres N Scale Ltl ~ ~ 0.5 0.0 ~ 0.5 Miles J 1.0 ~. 'd~~~~~~'l S _OF ~ \ Running Deer Annexation - Proposed City Pre-Zoning City of Lake Elsinore Cleveland National Forest . Rural Mountainous Residential (R-M-R) - 410 Acres . Rural Residential (RR) - 143 Acres l~i~~~t0cl Open Space (OS) - 35 Acres N Scme Li'l ~ ~ 0.5 0.0 ~ 0.5 ...~,. ~'I"\ r..CENDl\ \ l L'lV.~' PAC _ Miles J -w.o CITY OF ~ LAKE \6,LSiN.O~ ~.49 DREAM EXTREME", Notice of Neighborhood Information Meeting From: Kirt A. Coury (951) 674-3124 extension 274 Project Title: Running Deer Annexation Applicant City of Lake Elsinore Project Description: The proposed Running Deer Annexation covers 589.28 acres of land, currently located in the County of Riverside. The City of Lake Elsinore Planning Division is holding an information meeting with residents in and about the properties of the proposed annexation area. You are receiving this notification of the meeting as a courtesy to inform the property owners about the impact the proposed annexation will have on the City of Lake Elsinore and the properties in and adjacent to the proposed annexation. This meeting is not a public hearing, and no decisions regarding this project will be made by any city official or city staff. Comments and concerns may be expressed at the meeting and ultimately forwarded to the applicable future public hearings concerning this project. Project Location: The collective parcels are bound by the City of Lake Elsinore to the south and east, by the Cleveland National Forest to the west, and the conditionally approved Pacific Clay Annexation to the north (Lake Elsinore Annexation No. 72, LAFCO 2005-81-1 Reorganization). ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend this meeting and express opinions upon the item listed above, or to submit written comments to the Planning Division prior to this date. FURTHER INFORMATION on this item may be obtained by contacting Kirt Coury in the Planning Division, at City Hall (951) 674-3124, extension 274. All agenda materials are available for review. EXHIBIT 'E I Notii'e of Pub/ir Hearing! Meeting - ;orm No: PD 2000-30- Rel'iJed AuguJt, :.OO~. . _..... 'J 1 age I oj I f,Ci:NUf\ I L :fl NO. PAGE_(l_OF~L CITY~F A LAKE 6LSiNOR!: , I ~ DREAM EXTREME June 20, 2007 RE: Running Deer Annexation Dear Neighbor, The City of Lake Elsinore is processing an application to annex your property into the City's corporate boundaries. Throughout this annexation process, the City will continue to ensure that you are fully informed of the schedule, procedures and changes that annexation might bring to your area. The proposed Running Deer Annexation covers 589.28 acres of land. The collective bound by the City of Lake Elsinore to the south and east, by the west, and the conditionally approved Pacific Clay Annexation to Annexation No. 72, LAFCO 2005-81-1 Reorganization). As part of our effort to provide you with all the latest inf Running Deer Annexation area and a fact sheet on questions. have included a map for the responding to frequently asked If you have any questions or need additional . project planner, Kirt Coury, at 951-674-3124 tion regarding the project, please contact the r bye-mail at kcoury@lake-elsinore.org. Sincerely, Enclosures: Location Map Frequently Asked Questions Fact Sheet 951.674.3124 130 S. MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530 WWW.LAKE-ELSINORE.ORG fcWWA 1m:] 1<0. ~ ~ \ !J!.<::~._l ~_ OF AGENDA ITEM NO. PP"GE~ct.. CITYOF~. LAK...E 6LSiNOR&: \ . , . DREAM E)ITREME City of Lake Elsinore Running Deer Annexation Fact Sheet Background The proposed Running Deer Annexation covers 589.28 acres of land. The collective parcels are bound by the Oty of Lake Elsinore to the south and east, by the Oeveland National Forest to the west, and the conditionally approved Pacific Oay Annexation to the north (LakEi Elsinore Annexation No. 72, LAFCO 200~1-1 Reorganization).. Surrounded by the Oty of Lake Elsinore on three sides, the annexation area would bring this County "island" into the Oty's corporate boundaries and facilitate streamlining the delivery of public services to the residents of the unincorporated area. How will annexation affect you? A Greater Community Voice: . The City of Lake Elsinore is governed by a five member Gty Council. As residents of Lake Elsinore, you will be entitled to vote for candidates who you believe are most capable to represent the Oty and its people. As part of the Oty, you will have the opportunity to shape any future development and land uses in the community by participating in the Oty's open form of government. Residents will still be represented by Supervisor Bob Buster on the County level. Services: With close proximity to Oty facilities, residents will receive timely responses to public works/ street related problems. With the Oty's rapid response graffiti program, residents can call the Gty hotIine number or contact Code Enforcement to report graffiti. If the graffiti is located on public right-of-way property, Public Works will promptly remove the graffiti. If the graffiti is located on private property, the Oty will take action to work with the property owner on its removal. Residents will receive 24-hour emergency response services from Animal Services. Residents will receive code enforcement services in accordance with the Oty's. Municipal Code. Existing legal nonconforming uses will be permitted to remain so long as the use is not expanded, intensified, or enlarged. Savings: · All residents of the Oty of Lake Elsinore receive discounts on daily and annual boat launch fees including an annual $75 boat launch discount pass. Residents will not have to pay the non-resident fees to access Oty recreational activities. Residents receive free towing services provided through the Oty to get rid of unwanted cars or trucks through vehicle abatement program. Residents can dispose of household hazardous waste materials at no charge each Saturday of the month and dispose of motor oil at any local Kragen, Wal-Mart or AutoZone Center on any day of the week. Cost: Increased landscaping, lighting and trash collection services will result in residents paying an additional $3 a month. Annexed residents will not be required to pay any additional police and fire costs, but will continue receiving quality public safety services from Riverside County departments. p,cnJDA iTEM NO. '6 - PAGE_~\J~ City vs. County Municipal Services --- ~- --- ~---~ - - - -- --- -- - - - , - , I I ...J..__ -- - Annexation area residents No Don-resident fee to AcdvitiesJ Parks and Recreation Riverside County City of Lake Elsinore will 00 longer have to pay 130 Main St. jOin little leagues or adult DOn-resident. fees to access Lab Elsinore I...... or attend classes City recreational activities. at the communitv ccnter. Animal Services Riverside County Animal Friends of the Provides 24-hour 29001 Bastron Avenue Fhed Cat - $6 y..r Valley (AFV) emergency response. Lake Elsinore Faed D"I- S15 year Busineu License Riverside County City of Lake Elsinore City residents pay S72 FOf 130 Main Sl. $72 per year year for business lieense. Lake Elsinore Neighborhood Enhancement Team Code Enforcement Riverside County City of Lake Elsinore pro~ Household 130 Main SI. No additional cost Hazardous W.... disposal Lake Elsinore at no charge. Vohicle Abatement ora....... Station 60 23730 Vacation Dr., Cauyon Lake No additional cost to current residents. Station 10 Buycrsof new homos Riverside County Rivcn:ide County Fire 410 Graham, Lake Elsinore within the City of Lake Fire Fire Department Department None Elsinore will pay a (by conlract) Station 85 special tax for public 29045 Grand Ave. safety services: Lake Elsinore, CA S318.36 pel' SF S159.18 pel'MF ~::~n~~:::~n Riverside County Flood 130 Main St. Flood Control.. Local Control .It Water City of Lake Elsinore None Lake Elsinore No additional cost Conservalion. District Riverside County Flood Riverside County Flood 1995 Market SIreet Flood Control- Recional Cnotrol .It Water Cnotrol .It Water None Riverside No additional cost Conservalion. District Conservation. District City residents receive 130 Main St. Residents receive $15.00 Lake Elsinore Lake Operations City of Lake Elsinore City of Lake Elsinore discounts on daily and Lake Elsinore annual boat lauDch pan annual boat launch fees. discount Residents will pay approximately S25 pel' Main arterial streets within year into the Lake the City of Lake Elsinore 130 Main St. Elsjnore Lighting and Landseapinland Lightio& Riverside County City of Lake Elsinore will be 1andscaped and Lake Elsinore Landscaping Main.....ce District 10 fund City ~ beautified. lights, lraffic sisnaJs, Jandscaping and parle maintenance. Library Riverside County Ltbrary Riverside County None 600 Graham No additional cost Syatem Library Sys..m Lake Elsinore No additional cost to current residents. Buyers of new homes Riverside Riverside 333 Limited Aven.. within the City of Lake Police County Sheriff Department County Sheriff Department None Lake Elsinore Elsinore will pay a (by conlract) special tax for public safety services: S318.36 pel' SF SI59.18 mMF 40935 County Ceoter Drive, Suite C Property Taxes Riverside ColDlty Riverside County None Temecula No Additional cost Reapon$C time to public works/street related problems will improve 130 S. Main Street Public Works Riverside County City of Lake Elsinore ~ of proximity to Lake Elsinore No additional CCNlt City filcilities. City baa active graffiti removal oraaram. Road paving would be Riverside County City of Lake Elsinore completed sooner due to 130 S. Main Street No additional cost Road Paviol city's gravel paving Lake Elsinore pro8f8D1. Elsinore Valley Elsinore Valley Municipal 31315 Chaney Sewer Municipal Water District None Lake Elsinore N. additional cost Water District CR&R provides 3 containers (trash, sreen CR&R charges S19.63 waate and recycle) with per month for single Riverside County City of Lake Elsinore (by weeIcIy pick-up; Waste 130 Main St. family homes; Waste Trash Collection (by conlract with contract with CR&R Manaaement provides 2 Lake Elsinore Management charges W.... Management) Disposal) containen (trasb and S18.33 pel' month for recycle) witb recycle single family homes containers picked up bi- weeIcIv. Water Elsinore Valley Municipal Elsinore Valley Municipal , None 31315 Chaney No additional cost Water District Water District Lake Elsinore Building permit and plan check services will be Plan nine Rivenide County Planning City of Lake Elsinore availalllelocnIly at the City 130 Main St. Varies based on type of Department instead of the County of Lake Elsinore permit required. Riverside offices in Riverside. AGEND/I, ITEM NO. PACE ~\. ~. OF <2 ~\ TO: CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: OCTOBER 16, 2007 MATTHEW C. HARRIS, SENIOR PLANNER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007.15 & TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM PARCEL MAP NO. 35707 "MISSION TRAIL PROFESSIONAL OFFICE BUILDING COMPLEX" PREPARED BY: PROJECT TITLE: APPLICANT: SB&O INC. (ATTN: RUSS WESTWOOD), 41689 ENTERPRISE CIRCLE NORTH, SUITE 126, TEMECULA, CA 92590. OWNER: PUJJI DEVELOPMENT LLC. (ATTN: SANDY PUJJI) P.O. BOX 5000, PMB 104, RANCHO SANTA FE, CA 92067 PROJECT REQUEST The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Parcel Map to establish eighteen (18) individually owned professional office/condominium units within an existing 19,395 square-foot, two-story building on a .58 acre site within the Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) zoning district. Review is pursuant to Chapter 17.74 (Conditional Use Permit), Chapter 17.30 (Condominiums), Chapter 16 (Subdivisions) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code LEMC and the State Subdivision Map Act. PROJECT LOCATION The project site is located at 31900 Mission Trail Assessor Parcel Number 363-172-006. BACKGROUND The subject property, which consists of an existing fully developed professional office/commercial building and associated improvements, is located within the Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) zoning district. Since project submittal, staff has evaluated the existing improvements onsite and has added three (3) recommended conditions of approval pertaining to building signage, parking lot striping and onsite landscaping. AGENDA ITEM q P AGE I OF 02 5 -- PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-15 & TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 35707 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING EXISTING ZONING GENERAL PLAN lAND USE Project Office Building C-1 Site Neighborhood GC General Commercial Commercial North Vacant Lot C-1 GC General Neighborhood Commercial Commercial South Commercial C-1 GC General Neighborhood Commercial Commercial East Commercial C-1 GC General Neighborhood Commercial Commercial West Commercial C-1 SP - EL Neighborhood Eastlake Specific Commercial Plan PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project site is located within the Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) zoning district. lake Elsinore Municipal Code Section 17.44.020.A allows for all permitted uses of the Commercial Office (C-O) zone to be allowed in the C-1 zoning district including a wide range of professional office uses. The subject office building was constructed in 1976 in association with the development of the Mission Trail Shopping Center. The building was separated from the overall shopping center years later via a parcel map and is now under separate ownership. Existing recorded CC&R's allow for shared parking and reciprocal access with the remainder of the shopping center. The new property owner is proposing to convert the existing building into individually owned suites. Tentative Parcel MaD No. 35707 (For Condominium Purooses) The applicant requests approval to convert the existing office building into eighteen (18) office/commercial condominium suites. The condominium concept would allow the AGENDA ITEM 9 PAGE~OF ..25 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-15 & TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 35707 developer the ability to offer individual units for sale within the building while sharing common interest, ownership and maintenance responsibilities within the common areas. Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-15 Pursuant to Section 17.30.020 (Permits Required) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, (LEMC), the applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for the proposed condominium conversion. As allowed in the LEMC, the Planning Commission is empowered to grant and to deny applications for Conditional Use Permits and to impose reasonable conditions upon the granting of Conditional Use Permits. ANAL YSIS Tentative Condominium Parcel Map No. 35707 The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) required in association with the map will be recorded against the project as a condition of approval. In addition, an owners association will be empowered to administer and enforce the various elements of the CC&R's. To accomplish this, the owner's association will establish monthly fees that cover aspects such as landscape maintenance, parking lot maintenance and utility infrastructure improvements. The project has also been conditioned to require that the applicant submit a copy of the proposed CC&R's to the Planning Division for review and approval prior to recordation. Moreover, staff has added a condition of approval which will require that the association be established prior to the sale of the first condominium suite. Conditional Use Permit I n compliance with Chapter 17.30 (Condominiums and Condominium Conversions) of the LEMC the applicant has filed a request for a Conditional Use Permit. This request for a conditional use permit is consistent with the findings and requirements set forth in Chapter 17.74 (Conditional Use Permits) of the LEMC which states that: The City realizes that certain uses have operational characteristics that, depending upon the location and design of the use, may have the potential to negatively impact adjoining properties, businesses, or residents. Said uses therefore require a more comprehensive review and approval procedure, including the ability to condition the project, in order to mitigate any detrimental impact. In order to achieve this, the Planning Commission is empowered to grant and to deny applications for Conditional Use Permits and to impose reasonable conditions upon granting of Conditional Use Permits. Considering the potential ramification to the general health, safety, comfort, or general AGENDA ITEM q PAGE ~ OF d-.S PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-15 & TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 35707 welfare of the community, as admonished, staff has paid particular attention to specific technicalities related to the conversion of the existing office/commercial building. These details included the aesthetics and physical condition of both the office building and the overall subject property including parking facilities, landscaping and building signage. Upon site inspection, staff has determined that the existing office building was recently painted and appears in good condition overall. Moreover, the number of existing parking spaces available for office users is adequate. No additional building modifications or expansions are proposed at this time. However, staff believes that the following issues/improvements should be addressed in association with this conversion proposal: Buildinq Siqnaqe Given that multiple tenants will utilize the building, staff believes it is appropriate and necessary to require the establishment of a Uniform Sign Program onsite. The program will serve to ensure that building signage will have a quality uniform appearance for many years to come. Staff has added a condition of approval requiring that the sign program be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission prior to the recording of the final parcel map. Parkinq Lot Strioinq Upon site inspection, staff determined that the parking stall paint striping around the perimeter of the office building has significantly faded and is in need of repainting. Staff has added a condition of approval requiring that the parking lot be re-striped prior to the recordation of the Final Parcel Map. Landscaoinq While existing landscaped areas onsite are in generally good condition, staff has determined that some planter areas adjacent to the building along the Mission Trails frontage are in need of additional enhancement. Staff has added a recommended condition of approval requiring that the applicant submit a landscape plan for review and approval by the Community Development Director and that the landscaping improvements be installed prior to the recordation of the Final Parcel Map. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Staff has determined that the proposed project contained herein is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities). The building currently exists as leased office suites owned by one individual. The project proposes to convert the existing suites to into condominiums for individual sale. No expansion of the existing facilities is proposed. Therefore, no additional environmental clearance is necessary. AGENDA ITEM vp PAGE ---Y- OF :; C; PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-15 & TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 35707 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt; Resolution No. 2007-_ approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-15, Resolution No. 2007 -_recommending City Council adoption of findings of consistency with the Multiple-Species Habitat Conservation Plan, and Resolution No. 2007-_ recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Condominium Parcel Map No. 35707 based on the following Findings, Exhibits "A" and "B" and the proposed Conditions of Approval. PREPARED BY: MATTHEW C. HARRIS, SENIOR PLANNER APPROVED BY: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEN ATTACHMENTS: 1. VICINITY MAP 2. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS 3. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 4. NOTICE OF EXEMPTION 5. EXHIBITS . REDUCTIONS (8 % x 11) Exhibit A Tentative Condominium Parcel Map No. 35707 Exhibit B Conditional Use Permit Site Plan · FULL SIZE PLANS AGENDA ITEM ~ PAGE~OF ;)5 VICINITY MAP CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT No. 2007-15 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP No. 35707 CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION OF MISSION TRAIL PROFESSIONAL OFFICE BUILDING BARTCH CAMPBELL ST PLANNING COMMISSION 10/16/2007 \ AGENDA \TEM NO.. q .;2 5 PACE~OF. ~ RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-15 WHEREAS, SB&O Inc., c/o Russ Westwood, has filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore requesting the approval of Conditional Use Permit 2007-15 for the conversion of an existing eighteen unit office/commercial building into individually owned condominium units on property located at 31900 Mission Trail (APN: 363-172- 006); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of approving Conditional Use Permits for condominium projects; and WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given, and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on October 16,2007. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the proposed request for Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-15 and has found it acceptable. The Planning Commission finds and determines that this Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-15 is consistent with the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). SECTION 2. The California Legislature has determined that certain classes of projects do not have a significant effect on the environment and are therefore exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Pub. Res. Code ~~ 21000 et seq.: "CEQA") and the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (14 C.C.R. ~~ 15000 et seq.: the "CEQA Guidelines"). A Class 1 exemption for existing facilities consists of: "[TJhe operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of the lead agency's determination. . . . The key consideration is whether the project involves negligible or no expansion of an existing use." The Planning Commission finds and determines that the Conditional Use Permit is exempt from CEQA pursuant to a Class 1 exemption for existing facilities because the development that will occur as a result of issuing the Conditional Use Permit involves the conversion of existing for-lease suites to ownership condominiums for individual AGENDA ITEM NO. J::\~GE 7 q OF ;) 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE NO.2 OF 4 sale. No expansion of the existing facilities is proposed. Therefore no additional environmental clearance is necessary. SECTION 3. That in accordance with Chapter 17.74 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) the Planning Commission makes the following findings for the approval of Conditional Use Permit 2007-15: 1. The proposed use, on its own merits and within the context of its setting, is in accord with the objectives of the General Plan and the purpose of the planning district in which the site is located. In order to achieve a well balanced and functional mix of residential, commercial, industrial, open space, recreational and institutional land uses, the project has been evaluated in light of land use compatibility, noise, traffic and other environmental hazards. The proposed land use comports with the objectives of the General Plan and the purpose of the planning district in which the site is located. To the extent necessary, conditions of approval have been imposed upon the Conditional Use Permit to ensure that the conversion of the existing units to for-sale condominiums will not negatively impact the residents or guests of Lake Elsinore. 2. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the general health, safety, comfort, or general welfare of persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed use or the City, or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or the City. Given the potential for the office condominium use to have a potential impact the welfare of persons residing or working within the neighborhood or the City, all applicable City Departments and Agencies have been afforded the opportunity for a thorough review of the use and have incorporated all applicable comments and/or conditions related to installation and maintenance of the building, landscaping, sign age and onsite parking improvements so as to eliminate any negative impacts to the general health, safety, comfort, or general welfare of the surrounding neighborhood or the City. 3. The site for the intended use 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 Title 17 of the LEMC and the Historic Elsinore Architectural Design Guidelines. The proposed office/commercial condominium use has been designed in consideration of the size and shape of the property, thereby strengthening and enhancing the immediate commercial area. Further, the project as proposed, will complement the quality of existing development and will create a visually pleasing, non-detractive relationship between proposed and existing projects. The condominium complex has been reviewed to ensure adequate provision of landscaping and signage. ACENDA ITEM NO. j, PAGE.._. &L _._e OF_ ;) 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007. PAGE NO.3 OF 4 4. The site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways with proper design both as to width and type of pavement to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated by the subject use. The proposed condominium use has been reviewed in relation to the width and type of pavement needed to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated by the use. All potential impacts have been evaluated prior to the Planning Commission's approval of the Conditional Use Permit. 5. In approving the subject use located at Assessor Parcel Number 363-172-006, there will be no adverse affect on abutting property or the permitted and normal use thereof. The proposed use has been thoroughly reviewed and conditioned by all applicable City Departments and outside Agencies, eliminating the potential for any and all adverse effects on the abutting property. 6. Adequate conditions and safeguards pursuant to Section 17.74.50 of the LEMC have been incorporated into the approval of the Conditional Use Permit to insure that the use continues in a manner envisioned by these findings for the term of the use. Pursuant to Section 17.74.050 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, the condominium complex located at Assessor Parcel Number 363-172-006 has been scheduled for consideration and approval of the Planning Commission. SECTION 4. Based upon the evidence presented, the above findings, and the attached conditions of approval, the Planning Commission hereby approves Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-15. SECTION 5. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of October, 2007, by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: .1':;' r": r; ,. '-"l:M f.!O' Q Y"' :" lo... ~..pi'~ ~ , (;::~.~ ..~. ...... 1 PACE_ q OF .2--S-- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE NO.4 OF 4 ATTEST: Rolfe Preisendanz Director of Community Development Michael O'Neal, Chairman City of Lake Elsinore AGENDA ITEM NO. PACE {O if OF;)-S""- RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPT FINDINGS THAT THE ENTITLEMENTS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP) WHEREAS, S8&0 Inc. has submitted an application for Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-15 and Tentative Condominium Parcel No. 35707 (the "Entitlements"), for the development of the "Mission Trail Professional Office Complex" located within an existing office building at 31900 Mission (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, Section 6.0 of the MSHCP requires that all projects which are proposed on land covered by an MSHCP criteria cell and which require discretionary approval by the legislative body undergo the Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process ("LEAP") and a Joint Project Review ("JPR") between the City and the Regional Conservation Authority ("RCA") prior to public review of the project applications; and WHEREAS, Section 6.0 further requires that development projects not within an MSHCP criteria cell must be analyzed pursuant to the MSHCP "Plan Wide Requirements"; and WHEREAS, the Applications are discretionary in nature and require review and approval by the Planning Commission and/or City Council; and WHEREAS, the Applications are not within an MSHCP Criteria Cell, Core or Linkage, but are within the Elsinore Plan Area of the MSHCP, and therefore, the Project was reviewed pursuant to the MSHCP "Plan Wide Requirements"; and WHEREAS, Section 6.0 of the MSHCP requires that the City adopt consistency findings prior to approving any discretionary project entitlements for development of property that is subject to the MSHCP; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council regarding the consistency of discretionary entitlements with the MSHCP; and WHEREAS, public notice of the Entitlements has been given, and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on October 16, 2007. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the proposed application and its consistency with the MSHCP prior to making a decision to Jl.CENDt, ITBiI NO. Cf PAGE.., (I. OF,;) S'" PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE 2 OF 4 recommend that the City Council adopt findings that the Entitlements are consistent with the MSHCP. SECTION 2. That in accordance with the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code and the MSHCP, the Planning Commission makes the following findings: 1. The proposed project is a project under the City's MSHCP Resolution, and the City must make an MSHCP Consistency finding before approval. The Property is not located within a MSHCP Criteria Cell. However, the Property is within the Elsinore Plan Area and must be reviewed for consistency with the MSHCP "Plan Wide Requirements," including Section 6.1.2 Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines. 2. The proposed project is subject to the City's LEAP and the County's Joint Project Review processes. As stated above, the Property is not located within a MSHCP Criteria Cell and therefore the Entitlements were not reviewed through the LEAP or Joint Project Review processes. 3. The proposed project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines. The implementation of the Entitlements involves the conversion of an existing building with signage, striping of an existing parking lot, and on-site landscaping. No riverine/riparian areas, vernal pools, or fairy shrimp habitat are present on the project site. The project is therefore consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines set forth in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP. No further action regarding this section of the MSHCP is required. 4. The proposed project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines. Per MSHCP requirements, the Property is not subject to the Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines set forth in Section 6.1.3. No further action regarding this section of the MSHCP is required. 5. The proposed project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures. Per MSHCP requirements, the Property is not subject to the Critical Area Species Survey Area Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP. No further action regarding this section of the MSHCP is required. AGENDA ITEM NO. q PN]E~OF ;)~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE 3 OF 4 6. The proposed project is consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines. The Property is surrounded by existing development or graded parcels planned for development. Therefore, the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines set forth in Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP are not applicable. No further action regarding this section of the MSHCP is required. 7. The proposed project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements. There are no resources existing on the Property that would be subject to the requirements of Vegetation Mapping set forth in Section 6.3.1 of the MSHCP. No further action regarding this section of the MSHCP is required. 8. The proposed project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines. As stated above, the Property is surrounded by existing and planned development. Therefore, the Fuels Management Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.4 of the MSHCP are not applicable. No further action regarding this section of the MSHCP is required. 9. The proposed project will be conditioned to pay the City's MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee. The developer will be required to pay the City's MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee. 10. The proposed project is consistent with the MSHCP. The Entitlements are consistent with all applicable provisions of the MSHCP. No further actions related to the MSHCP are required. SECTION 3. Based upon the evidence presented, the above findings, and the attached conditions of approval, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore adopt findings that the Entitlements are consistent with the MSHCP. SECTION 4. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. tJJEfm,t\ \TEt\'l NO. q PJ\GE I 3 OF d S-- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE40F4 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of October 2007, by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Michael O'Neal, Chairman Lake Elsinore Planning Commission ATTEST: Rolfe M. Preisendanz Director of Community Development ACENDA iTEM NO. 1 PAGE /'1- OF :::>~ RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM PARCEL MAP NO. 35707 FOR MISSION TRAIL OFFICE/COMMERCIAL BUILDING WHEREAS, S8&0 Inc., c/o Russ Westwood, filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore requesting approval of Tentative Condominium Parcel Map No. 35707 for the conversion of an existing office/commercial building into eighteen individually owned condominium suites (the "Project") on property located at 31900 Mission Trail (APN: 363-172-006); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of reviewing and making recommendations to the City Council regarding Tentative Condominium Maps; and WHEREAS, public notice of the Project has been given, and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on October 16, 2007. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the Project and has found it acceptable. The Planning Commission finds and determines that the Project is consistent with Title 16 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code and Section(s) 66424 and 66427 of the California Government Code. SECTION 2. The California Legislature has determined that certain classes of projects do not have a significant effect on the environment and are therefore exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Pub. Res. Code 9921000 et seq.: "CEQA") and the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (14 C.C.R. 99 15000 et seq.: the "CEQA Guidelines"). A Class 1 exemption for existing facilities consists of: "[TJhe operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of the lead agency's determination. . . . The key consideration is whether the project involves negligible or no expansion of an existing use. 11 The Planning Commission finds and determines that the Conditional Use Permit is exempt from CEQA pursuant to a Class 1 exemption for existing facilities because the development that will occur as a result of issuing the Conditional Use Permit involves the conversion of existing for-lease suites to ownership condominiums for individual !,G;.:NDA ntf,,~ NO. PAGE / S 1 OF ..)Q PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE 2 OF 3 sale. No expansion of the existing facilities is proposed. Therefore no additional environmental clearance is necessary. SECTION 3. That in accordance with Government Code Sections 66424 and 66427 and Title 16 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, the Planning Commission makes the following findings for the approval of the Tentative Condominium Map 35707: 1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed subdivision is compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan (Government Code Section 66473.5). The Project, as designed, assists in achieving the development of a well- balanced and functional mix of residential, commercial, industrial, open space, recreational and institutional land uses (GOAL 1.0, Land Use Element) as well as provides decent business opporlunities and a satisfying office environment. 2. The effects that this Project is likely to have upon the economic needs of the region, the business requirements of its residents and the available fiscal and environmental resources have been considered and balanced. The condominium spaces proposed by the Project will serve to enhance and improve the economic needs of the region and the business needs of the Lake Elsinore community by providing additional individually owned office/commercial condominium space opportunities for local residents and businesses. 3. Subject to the attached conditions of approval, the Project is not anticipated to result in any significant environmental impact. The project has been adequately conditioned by all applicable departments and agencies and will not result in any significant environmental impacts. SECTION 4. Based upon the evidence presented, the above findings, and the attached conditions of approval, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore approve Tentative Condominium Map No. 35707. SECTION 5. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. ACENDA ITEM NO. PP,CE I b 9 OF ;) S-- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE 3 OF 3 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of October, 2007, by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Michael O'Neal, Chairman City of Lake Elsinore ATTEST: Rolfe Preisendanz Director of Community Development AGENDt, !TEM NO. q f'je,GE (7 OF ~( CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PROJECT NAME: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007 -15 & TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM PARCEL MAP NO. 35707 FOR CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING OFFICE/COMMERCIAL BUILlDNG TO SEPERATEL Y OWNED OFFICE CONDOMINIM UNITS LOCATED AT 31900 MISSION TRAIL (APN: 363-172-006) PLANNING DIVISION General Conditions: 1. The applicant shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its Officials, Officers, Employees, and Agents from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City, its Officials, Officers, Employees or Agents to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning the Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Condominium Parcel Map attached hereto. 2. The applicant shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or money order made payable to the Riverside County Clerk in the amount of $64.00 to enable the City to file the Notice of Exemption. Said filing fee shall be provided to the City within 48 hours of project approval. 3. The decision of the Planning Commission shall be final fifteen (15) days from the date of the decision, unless an appeal has been filed with the City Council pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 17.80 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-15: 4. The Conditional Use Permit shall comply with the all applicable requirements of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code; Title 17 unless modified by approved Conditions of Approval. 5. The Conditional Use Permit granted herein shall run with the land and shall continue to be valid upon a change of ownership of the site or structure which was the subject of this approval. Tentative Condominium Parcel Map No. 35707: 6. Tentative Condominium Parcel Map No. 35707 will expire two (2) years from date of approval unless within that period of time the CC&R's and an ACEi\1D.4 ITEf.., NO. 9 PACE I~.~. ,.. ~OF_ ~ --:: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007.15 & TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 35707 Page 2 of 5 appropriate instrument has been filed and recorded with the County Recorder, or an extension of time is granted by the City of Lake Elsinore City Council in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act. 7. The Tentative Parcel Map for condominium purposes 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 approved Conditions of Approval. 8. Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall prepare and record CC&R's against the office/commercial condominium complex. The CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director or Designee and the City Attorney. The CC&R's shall include methods of maintaining common areas, parking and drive aisle areas, landscaped areas including parkways, and methods for common maintenance of all underground, and above ground utility infrastructure improvements necessary to support the complex. 9. The CC&R's shall expressly designate the City of Lake Elsinore as a third party beneficiary to the CC&R's such that the City has the right, but not the obligation, to enforce the provisions of the CC&R's. 10. No unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owner's group or similar entity has been formed with the right to financially assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and duty to maintain, all said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CC&R's which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or office/commercial units and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. The recorded CC&R's shall establish the City of Lake Elsinore an expressed third party beneficiary. The City shall have the right, but not the obligation to enforce the CC&R's. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the City prior to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. 11 . Membership in the Owner's Association shall be mandatory for each buyer and any successive buyer. 12. Reciprocal covenants, conditions, and restrictions and reciprocal maintenance agreements shall be established which will cause a merging of all development phases as they are completed, and embody one (1) owner's Agenda q :./ pagel!L of dO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-15 & TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 35707 Page 3 of 5 association with common area for the total development of the subject project. 13. In the event the association or other legally responsible person(s) fail to maintain said common area in such a manner as to cause same to constitute a public nuisance, said City may, upon proper notice and hearing, institute summary abatement procedures and impose a lien for the costs of such abatement upon said common area, individual units or whole thereof as provided by law. 14. Each condominium unit owner shall have full access to commonly owned areas, facilities and utilities. 15. Prior to recording of the final parcel map, the applicant shall sign and complete an "Acknowledgement of Conditions" form and shall return the executed original to the Planning Division for inclusion in the case records. 16. Three (3) sets of the Final Landscaping/lrrigation Detail Plan shall be submitted, reviewed and approved by the City's Landscape Architect Consultant and the Community Development Director or designee, prior to recording of the final parcel map. A Landscape Plan Check & Inspection Fee will be charged prior to final landscape approval. The Plan shall only address current landscaping deficiencies within the existing landscape area along the Mission Trail property frontage. a. All planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler system with 100% plant and grass coverage using a combination of drip and conventional irrigation methods. b. Plantings within fifteen feet (15') of ingress/egress points shall be no higher than thirty-six inches (36"). c. Any transformers and mechanical or electrical equipment shall be indicated on landscape plan and screened as part of the landscaping plan. d. Final landscape plans to include planting and irrigation details. e. 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. Thirty percent (30%) of shrubs required on slopes shall be five-gallon container size. Agenda 9 page~Of~ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007.15 & TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 35707 Page 4 of 5 f. All landscape improvements shall be bonded 100% for material and labor for one year from installation sign-off by the City. Release of the landscaping bond shall be requested by the applicant at the end of the required year with approval/acceptance by the Landscape Consultant and Community Development Director or Designee. g. All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed within affected portions of the site prior to recordation of the final parcel map. 17. A Uniform Sign Program, for both freestanding and wall mounted signage, shall be prepared and approved by the Planning Commission prior to recordation of the final parcel map. 18. Existing parking spaces within the onsite parking area shall be re-striped pursuant to the LEMC, prior to recordation of the final parcel map. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT General Requirements: 19. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained prior to any work on City right-of- way. 20. All waste material, debris, vegetation and other rubbish generated 9uring cleaning, demolition, clear and grubbing or other phases of the construction shall be disposed of at appropriate recycling centers. The applicant should contract with CR&R Inc. for recycling and storage container services, but the applicant may use the services of another recycling vendor. Another recycling vendor, other than CR&R Inc., cannot charge the applicant for bin rental or solid waste disposal. If the applicant is not using CR&R Inc. for recycling services and the recycling material is either sold or donated to another vendor, the applicant shall supply proof of debris disposal at a recycling center, including verification of tonnage by certified weigh master tickets. 21. In accordance with the City's Franchise Agreement for waste disposal & recycling, the applicant shall be required to contract with CR&R Inc. for removal and disposal of all waste material, debris, vegetation and other rubbish generated during cleaning, demolition, clear and grubbing or all other phases of construction. 22. On-site drainage shall be conveyed to a public facility, accepted by adjacent property owners by a letter of drainage acceptance, or conveyed to a drainage easement. Agenda 9 .-- pageJ-1 of -dS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007.15 & TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 35707 Page 5 of 5 23. All natural drainage traversing the site shall be conveyed through the site, or shall be collected and conveyed by a method approved by the City Engineer. 24. City of Lake Elsinore has adopted ordinances for storm water management and discharge control. In accordance with state and federal law, these local storm water ordinances prohibit the discharge of waste into storm drain system or local surface waters. This includes non-storm water discharges containing oil, grease, detergents, trash, or other waste remains. Brochures of "Storm water Pollution, What You Should Know" describing preventing measures are available at City Hall. PLEASE NOTE: The discharge of pollutants into street, gutters, storm drain system, or waterways -without Regional Water Quality Control Board permit or waver - is strictly prohibited by local ordinances and state and federal law. Prior to Approval of Final Map: 25. Dedicate 10' right-of-way along the project frontage on Mission Trail such that the centerline to curb line is 60 feet. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained for private facilities located within the new 10' dedication. 26. All property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map. 27. A condominium plan shall be included with the final map. 28. Pay all Capital Improvement Impact/Mitigation Fees and Plan Check fees (LEMC 16.34). Agenda 9 page/d-of4 CITY OF ~ LAKE '&JLsiNOIU: V DREAM EXTREME1\! Notice of Exemption Filed With: 0 Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Sacramento, CA 95814 [8J County derk of Riverside County 2724 Gateway Drive Riverside, CA 92507 Project Title: Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-15 & Tentative Condominium Parcel Map No. 35707 Project Location (Specific): 31900 Mission Trail (APN: 363-172-006). Project Location (Gt)?: Gtyof Lake Elsinore Project Location (Count)?: Riverside County Description of Nature, Purpose, and Beneficiaries of Project: A Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Condominium Parcel Map to establish eighteen (18) office/commercial condominium units within an existing 19,395 square-foot, two-story building. The subject property has a Zoning designation of C-l (Neighborhood Commercial) and a General Plan land use designation ofGC (General Commercial). Name of Public Agency Approving Project: Gty of Lake Elsinore Name of Person / Agency Administrating Project: Matthew C. Harris, Senior Planner, Gty of Lake Elsinore Exempt Status: D Ministerial (Section 15073) D Declared Emergency (Section 15071 (a)) D Emergency Project (Section 15071 (b) and (c)) IRI Categorical Exemption (state type and section number): Article 19 Categorical Exemptions Section 15301, Existing Facilities Reasons why project is exempt: This project meets the requirements pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The project proposes to convert existing office/commercial spaces into condominium units for individual sale. No expansion of the existing facility is proposed. Therefore, no additional environmental clearance is necessary. Contact Person: Matthew Harris, Senior Planner Telephone Number: (951) 674-3124 x 295 Signed: Title: Director of Community Development Rolfe M Preisendanz AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE ;;-- ~ q OF?-r- ~ I il!IIUJ "liB sllNe. .LI~ i ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~! ; G ~ I I ~ I~ ; ~ e 1- .... ~ 5 rT"';~'~'I:~~ I [II I I~ I I I ~ H I ~ Q I II I I I H I I I , ~ ~ I I ,- ~ I If 1\ \~l II 1\ I~ .--'\~ ,,~~. ~ 1\ .~ fI .. ~ ~ II " " " " . ~ ~ ~ ImI II.. . ~ ,,1)1 I ~~ II ~~'II~. \\ ~;; n S o II C ~ ;: :> fn ~ .'~;:! 111 C) \.~hQ ~ Q6 ""'7J m I I I I Hlllllllq ~ ~ I ~ i ; A~ ~ I ~ I lull- l ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ e if ~~~ , ~ ~ Ii:' l:' l< , U I'" '" /, ~~~;:;~~ / I l~~ ~ I l\) / L___ _____________ JI Q;~L_________ , I I I I I I ~--- -L:::..TlR - ~ I I __--1____ I I I I 00\ IE]" ~ U ;i! iiill Ui I ill Ii III i II i i i i i i i ! i i i i ~ ~l! all~1 I"~"~ il ~I~ ~~ ~ ~ . I ~ I ~ ~ : ~ ~ ~ ~ I~d I~ !a~ ~ ~!~ !I! 1;1 ;11 ~ II U i ~ II d U i ~I' r ~~!~ h ill m~li 1;1 ~ iU~ii i i ; ~ ~ ~i~j i~ ~Ii 2 I a~U ~~ II P 1 ~ I J~ ~~ '"~ q~ hI h~ ~ H ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I !~~ I~ ~~ ~~~~ ~~ I ~~ , l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ I~I~~ ~~i 11 ~I~!~ 1 si~~ ~~ I~ ~ ~ IIJ~ ~~ '.I. ~ ~ Ii ~~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ AGEN~' TEM NO. n~~u ~ ~~I~ G~~i ~i*~ ~ I Ill! III 9 PAGE "''l'''''lI'l''''''''i:r'''l!PlI''; I I W: I~ I ~ I I 1 iii <:> I ~ I I H :!i II I I I t 1i111niiq ql~i;I~~;~ I p:ll: ~ ~ ~~ ~ .~ I ~ ~ 1/ ~// ~ Id~~ , / , ~1~1ii;~B / I '!.:!t ~ 1 l\:a / L___ _____________ ~ ii;~~_________ I I ~ I jil~i l~~. .D. .' '" iNC,: J f I !l! !l! ~ n~ . I I ~ ! ~ R I I l ~ I ~; ~115 ; i ~ I ~ ~ '-4 ~ e ~ ~ ~ 1- ... ~ ~ /-- ~ / Ii \I \~ ~ \I I~ r1\~ : ~ \\ ~ ~ ~ ~ I: /I /I /I " ~ ~ Wi P :... :... IIf!1i ; U I: ~~~~. \\ ~" .~\ .~ , "' - . ~ ~ I I I I L___ -L::""- ~ ~ '.J ~ ~ !~i! III ~l t~ Ij I!I ~ ~ ~~~ i :ql~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ I I! ii ;1 I~ mi i~~'-t ;!~i ~ ~2_~ ~~i(\ Ui I ~;;i ~i ~ I ~ ~ u i i ~ i i i ~ I~!~ ~ 1~1~li! il~ t~ll~ ' . ~ I H i n @~Ji glai ~I! i;1 ill "I U ! i ~I'I ~ ~h~ ~i*i i 1;1 ~;I ~ ilUii 1- ~ ~ii~ ~. I~q!~ ~~~ I ~J~ a ~I ~~~ i ~I ~ ~,~ ~: i ~~~ i~i~ !i~ a:; ~l i ! ;;~ ~ i~ ~~ III ~ ~ ~!i AGEN~:~~E5<(. OF d ~ --- CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION TO: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: OCTOBER 16, 2007 PREPARED BY: KIRT A. COURY, PROJECT PLANNER PROJECT TITLE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-12 FOR A DRIVE THROUGH LANE LOCATED AT PLANNING AREA NO.4, BUILDING NO. 18 WITHIN THE CANYON HILLS MARKET PLACE APPLICANT: OWNER: MARK RADELOW, SUDBERRY DEVELOMENT, 5465 MOREHOUSE DRIVE, STE. 260, SAN DIEGO, CA 92121 CHMP, LLC, SUDBERRY DEVELOMENT, 5465 MOREHOUSE DRIVE, STE. 260, SAN DIEGO, CA 92121 PROJECT REQUEST The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to allow for a drive through lane to accommodate a future business to be located at Building No. 18 within the Canyon Hills Market Place. Review and analysis is pursuant to the Canyon Hills Specific Plan Amendment No.2, Chapter 17.38 (Non-Residential Design Review), and Chapter 17.74 (Conditional Use Permits) of the LEMC. PROJECT LOCATION The project site is located at the southeast corner of Railroad Canyon Road and Canyon Hills Drive, Planning Area No.4; Building No. 18. BACKGROUND In November 2004 the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore approved by resolution the design and establishment of the Canyon Hills Market Place within Planning Areas 3 and 4 of the Canyon Hills Specific Plan. Entitlements granted for Planning Area 4 (which covers 14 acres) included a Commercial Design Review, two (2) Conditional Use Permits, and a AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE I 10 OF I fo PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-12; FOR A DRIVE THROUGH LANE AT BUILDING NO. 16 IN THE CANYON HILLS MARKET PLACE Uniform Sign Program for the Center. At present, there are five (5) remaining vacant lots along Canyon Hills Drive and within Planning Area NO.4. On June 11, 2007 the applicant submitted to the Community Development Department an application for a Conditional Use Permit, which is necessary to ensure that the proposed property use conforms and is consistent with the Canyon Hills Specific Plan. The applicant has worked diligently with staff in resolving issues related to this Conditional Use Permit application. There are no outstanding issues to report. Staff supports the Conditional Use Permit request. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Project Canyon Hills Specific Site Plan North Vacant OS (Open Space) Canyon Hills Specific Plan South Vacant OS (Open Space) Canyon Hills Specific Plan East Multi Family MF2 (PA 4) Canyon Hills Specific Condominiums Plan West Vacant OS (Open Space) Canyon Hills Specific Plan PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is requesting the approval of a conditional use permit to allow for the establishment of a "drive-through" lane for a future tenant. The request for the "drive- through" lane is pursuant to the applicable chapters of the Canyon Hills Specific Plan Amendment No. 2 and the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. It should be noted that the applicant has not submitted an application for building and site plan design review at this time. The purpose of the request is to enable the applicant to market the space to prospective tenants. However, a definitive tenant has not been identified (Le. drive through restaurant, bank, coffee shop etc.). AGENDi\ rn::1'.1 NO. PAGE d to OF I Co PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-12; FOR A DRIVE THROUGH LANE AT BUILDING NO. 16 IN THE CANYON HILLS MARKET PLACE ANAL YSIS The proposed drive-through has been found in conformance with all applicable standards of the Canyon Hills Specific Plan Amendment No.2, and the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. With the proposed conditions of approval, Staff determined that the proposed project will compliment the existing and proposed development in the surrounding area. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Addendum NO.2 to the certified Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse No. 87111606 (the "FEIR") for the Cottonwood Hills Specific Plan was prepared and approved by the City Council in March 2007 to address minor changes associated with Specific Plan Amendment No. 2 to the Cottonwood Hills Specific Plan (renamed the Canyon Hills Specific Plan as part of Specific Plan Amendment No.2). This Conditional Use Permit request and other small corrections like it were contemplated by Specific Plan Amendment NO.2. The Conditional Use Permit request does not present substantial changes or new information regarding the potential environmental impacts that were analyzed in the FEIR or the changes addressed in Addendum No 2. No new CEQA documentation is necessary for the Project. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2007-_ adopting consistency findings with the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and Resolution No._ approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-12 based on the Findings, Exhibits, and proposed Conditions of Approval. PREPARED BY: KIRT A. COURY, PROJECT PLANNER ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, r:h/Y'J1 DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEK-f 1'// '----- APPROVED BY: ATTACHMENTS: 1. VICINITY MAP 2. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS 3. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 4. EXHIBITS . REDUCTIONS (8 % x 11) Exhibit A. Site Plan with Drive Through Lane Location 5. FULL SIZE PLAN SET ,-.,.1'D. !\ '~',,"~O ~'O '0 P,VC:,~,H,II.:I.)I\j .~ Pi\GE '3 or- I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ u ~ > ~ ~, "-t:s c:: QJ QJ .....,.J II) < I&l It: < ... z ~ C) z Z z j IL. . . .. ". .. . . . . + + .. . . . . .. . .. .. . ~ + .. . . + 4 . . . ... .. . +....... .:.:.:.. . . to . 4 . . . .. .. . . .. . .. + .. .. . + + 4 It: t.,I m :::E ~. z ... 0 0 z < < ::> 0 0 C). It: a: Z It: a: Z 0 0 % .,., z 5 < ~ :::E IL. , . . . . . . to t. . - . . . . . , I&l o < IL. II) Z I&l. IL. o ...J ~ ::> !;( z / Canyon Hills f", ACENDA ntM NO. PACE_ If. [0 OF./ b RESOLUTION NO. 2007- RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING FINDINGS THAT THE ENTITLEMENT IS EXEMPT FROM THE MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP) WHEREAS, Sudberry Development has submitted an application for Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-12 (the "Entitlement"), for the establishment of a single drive through lane (the "Project") located at Building No. 18 of the Lake Canyon Hills Market Place, Planning Area No.4; and WHEREAS, Section IV(D) of the City of Lake Elsinore's MSHCP Implementing Resolution expressly exempts from the MSHCP: Any project for which and to the extent that vested rights to proceed with the project notwithstanding the enactment of this Resolution exist under the common laws of the State of California, a vesting tentative map pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, a development agreement pursuant to Government Code section 65864 et seq., or other instrument, approved or executed by the City prior to adoption of this Resolution. Projects subject to this exemption must comply with all provisions of any applicable state and federal law. WHEREAS, public notice of the Entitlement has been given, and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on October 16, 2007. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the Project and its exemption from the MSHCP "Plan Wide Requirements" prior to making findings that the project is indeed exempt. SECTION 2. That in accordance with the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code and the MSHCP, the Planning Commission makes the following findings: 1. The Project is a project under the City's MSHCP Resolution, and the City must make an MSHCP Consistency finding before approval. The Entitlement is exempt from the City's MSHCP Resolution. On July 9, 1990, the City and Pardee-Grossman/Cottonwood Canyon entered into that certain development agreement (the "Development Agreement'J, which expressly exempted the Developer from responsibility for any new development impact fees. The Development Agreement will expire on July 9, 2010. AGENDA !TtlJj li~~ PACE S OF { PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE20F3 - Even though the Entitlement is exempt from the MSHCP, the Developer must comply with other state and federal laws. Consistent with federal law, the applicant had prepared a project-specific Habitat Conservation Plan and has a history of extensive coordination with the wildlife agencies. Where approved for development, the project site has already been graded, cleared, or developed in accordance with the Project HCP. Given the foregoing, no further action regarding the MSCHP is required. 2. The proposed project is subject to the City's LEAP and the County's Joint Project Review processes. See Response #1 above. 3. The proposed project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines. See Response #1 above. 4. The proposed project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines. See Response #1 above. 5. The proposed project IS consistent with the UrbanIWildlands Interface Guidelines. See Response #1 above. 6. The proposed project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements. See Response #1 above. 7. The proposed project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures. See Response #1 above. 8. The proposed project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines. See Response #1 above. 9. The proposed project will be conditioned to pay the City's MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee. Developer is exempt from payment of the City's MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee by virtue of the Development Agreement. 10. The proposed project is consistent with the MSHCP. See Response #1 above. SECTION 3. Based upon the evidence presented, the above findings, and the attached conditions of approval, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council find that the Entitlement is exempt from the MSHCP. ACENDA ITEM NO. PACE ~ 10 OF I Co -- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE 3 OF 3 SECTION 4. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of October 2007, by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Michael O'Neal, Chairman Lake Elsinore Planning Commission ATTEST: Rolfe M. Preisendanz Director of Community Development ACENDA ITEM f-JO. PP.CE ( (0 OF {t? RESOLUTION NO. 2007- RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007 -12 WHEREAS, Sudberry Development, has initiated proceedings to request the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-12 for the establishment of a single drive through lane (the "Entitlement") located at Building No. 18 of the Lake Canyon Hills Market Place, Planning Area No.4; and WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elsinore recognizes that certain uses have operational characteristics that, depending upon the location and design of the use, may have the potential to negatively impact adjoining properties, businesses or residents and therefore are permitted subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit, which allows the City to comprehensively review and approve the use; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of considering and approving, conditionally approving, or denying conditional use permits; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Pub. Res. Code 99 21000 et seq.: "CEQA") and the CEQA Guidelines (14 C.C.R. 99 15000 et seq.), public agencies are expressly encouraged to reduce delay and paperwork associated with the implementation of CEQA by using previously prepared environmental documents when those previously prepared documents adequately address the potential impacts of the proposed project (CEQA Guidelines Section 15006); and WHEREAS, CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a) states that "When an EIR has been certified or negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following: 1. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; 2. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or 3. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence AGENDA ITEM NO. I 0 .__~ PACE 8 ~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE 2 OF 5 at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following: (A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration; (B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; (C) 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 project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative."; and WHEREAS, Addendum NO.2 to the certified Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse No. 87111606 (the "FEIR") for the Cottonwood Hills Specific Plan was prepared and approved by the City Council in March 2007 to address minor changes associated with Specific Plan Amendment No. 2 to the Cottonwood Hills Specific Plan (renamed the Canyon Hills Specific Plan as part of Specific Plan Amendment No.2). Said Addendum evaluated environmental impacts that would result from development of the shopping center, which included Building No. 16 where the proposed drive-through will be located; and WHEREAS, the Project does not present substantial changes or new information regarding the potential environmental impacts of development; and WHEREAS, public notice of the Entitlement has been given, and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on October 16, 2007. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the proposed Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-12 prior to rendering its decision and finds that the requirements of Chapter 17.74 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code have been satisfied. ACENDA ITEM NO.~ PAGE_LOF (~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE 3 OF 5 SECTION 2. The Planning Commission finds and determines that in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, the Entitlement does not present a substantial change or new information that would require further CEQA analysis. The environmental impacts associated with development of the Entitlement were contemplated by Addendum No. 2 to the certified Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse No. 87111606 (the "FEIR") for the Cottonwood Hills Specific Plan and were fully analyzed and mitigated therein. No new CEQA documentation is necessary for the Entitlement. SECTION 3. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning Law, the Canyon Hills Specific Plan Amendment No. 2 and the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, the Planning Commission makes the following findings for approval of CUP 2007-12: 1. The proposed use, on its own merits and within the context of its setting, is in accord with the objectives of the General Plan and the purpose of the planning district in which the site is located. Issuance of this Conditional Use Permit will facilitate the creation of a well balanced and functional mix of residential, commercial, industrial, open space, recreational and institutional land uses. The proposed land use conforms to the objectives of the General Plan and the Canyon Hills Specific Plan NO.2. 2. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the general health, safety, comfort, or general welfare of persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed use or the City, or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or the City. All applicable City departments and agencies have been afforded the opportunity to review the use permit and their comments have been addressed in the conditions of approval attached to the staff report for this Project. Conditions have been applied relating to the proposed use, so as to eliminate any negative impacts to the general health, safety, comfort, or general welfare of the surrounding neighborhood or the City. 3. The site for the intended use 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 Title 17 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. The proposed drive-thru has been designed in consideration of the size and shape of the Project Site, thereby strengthening and enhancing the immediate commercial area. Further, the proposed use will complement the quality of existing development and will create a visually pleasing, non-detractive relationship between the proposed and existing projects, in that the facility design has been reviewed to ensure adequate provision of screening from the adjacent properties. ACENDA ITEf.'1 NO. I 0 PAGE~_OF~~_ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE 4 OF 5 4. The site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways with proper design both as to width and type of pavement to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated by the subject use. The proposed drive-thru facility use has been reviewed in relation to the width and type of pavement needed to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated. The City has adequately evaluated the potential impacts associated with the proposed facility prior to its approval and has conditioned the Project to be served by roads of adequate capacity and design standards to provide reasonable access by car, truck, and emergency services vehicles. 5. In approving the subject use, there will be no adverse affect on abutting property or the permitted and normal use thereof. The Project has been thoroughly reviewed and conditioned by all applicable City departments and outside agencies, eliminating the potential for any and all adverse effects on the abutting property. 6. Adequate conditions and safeguards pursuant to Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Section 17.74.50 have been incorporated into the approval of the Conditional Use Permit to insure that the use continues in a manner envisioned by these findings for the term of the use. Pursuant to Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Section 17. 74.050, the proposed drive-thru facility use has been scheduled for consideration and approval of the Planning Commission at the regularly scheduled meeting on October 16, 2007. SECTION 4. Based upon the evidence presented, the above findings, and the attached conditions of approval, the Planning Commission hereby approves Conditional Use Permit 2007-12. SECTION 5. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. AGENDA ITEM NO. / 0 PAm:_~OF~_ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE 5 OF 5 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of October 2007, by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Michael O'Neal, Chairman City of Lake Elsinore ATTEST: Rolfe Preisendanz Director of Community Development AGENDfI. HE:'':; i~O. I G PACE I d- OF I (0 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-12 FOR A DRIVE THROUGH LANE LOCATED AT BUILDING NO. 18 WITHIN THE CANYON HILLS MARKET PLACE PLANNING General Conditions 1. The applicant shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its Officials, Officers, Employees, and Agents from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City, its Officials, Officers, Employees or Agents to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning the Conditional Use Permit (Drive Through Lane) project attached hereto. 2. The applicant shall place a weatherproof 3' x 3' sign at the entrance to the project site identifying the approved days and hours of construction (7 AM - 7 PM, Monday through Friday with no construction activity to occur on Saturdays, Sundays or legal holidays) activity and a statement that complaints regarding the operation can be lodged with the City of Lake Elsinore Code Enforcement Division (951) 674-3124. The sign shall be installed prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 3. All Conditions of Approval shall be reproduced upon page one of building plans submitted to the Building and Safety Division for Plan Check. 4. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, the applicant shall sign and complete an "Acknowledgement of Conditions," and shall return the executed original to the Community Development Department for inclusion in the case records. 5. The 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 control techniques. Interim erosion control measures shall be provided thirty (30) days after the site's rough grading, as approved by the City Engineer. 6. The proposed location of onsite construction trailers shall be approved by the Director of Community Development or Designee. A cash bond of $1,000.00 shall be required for any construction trailers placed on the site and used during construction. Bonds will be released after removal of trailers and restoration of the site to an acceptable state, subject to the approval of the Director of Community Development or designee. Planning Commission AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE ('3 fO OF (b 7. The project shall provide a minimum of eight (8) vehicle stacking/queing area for the drive through lane in accordance with City code. 8. The applicant shall comply with all applicable City codes and ordinances. 9. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval associated with the Canyon Hills Market Place and Planning Area No.4. 10. Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-12 does not constitute approval for any building design or site plan layout. Future building architectural design and site plan layout shall be subject to the City's Commercial Design Review process. Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-12 11. The Conditional Use Permit approved herein shall lapse and shall become void one (1) year following the date on which the use permit became effective, unless prior to the expiration of one (1) year a building permit is issued and construction commenced and diligently pursued toward completion on the site. 12. The Conditional Use Permit shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, Title 17 unless modified by approved Conditions of Approval. 13. The Conditional Use Permit granted herein shall run with the land, once said use is established, and shall continue to be valid upon a change of ownership of the site or structure which was the subject of this approval. 14. The applicant shall at all times comply with Section 17.78 (Noise Control) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. 15. Necessary traffic circulation signage shall be erected onsite in association with the drive-thru lane. Signage shall be reviewed by the Director of Community Development or designee. COMMUMTYSERWCESDEPARTMENT 16. The Developer shall pay park fees in the amount of $0.10 per square foot for all interior commercial space. 17. Developer shall comply with all City Ordinances regarding construction debris removal and recycling as per Section 8.32 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. 18. The Developer is to maintain all common landscaped areas. Planning Commission AGENDA ITEM NO. ( 0 PAGE I Y- OF .-L 0 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 19. The applicant shall comply with all Riverside County Fire Departments requirements and standards. Planning Commission AGEND,q ITEM NO. 10 PAGE {S OF I b Cl Z '15 --:-..J a..- .:> :>a> !J~ I-a.; ~'< wJ: a..Cl w:> ~O <i!~ ZI- O~ Eli! Cc Z", 00 Uu.. ~ . ~ !il I! In ~n I- .~ ~~ ~ h ~~ z ~~ ~5 ~ ~~ i~ :: ~1i ~~ ~ h ~~ ~ 2g ~/l u::;:: N' I ~ !~ l: hlftl II ~ ~~ i 8 i ~ ~ ~hU 1l ~ ~ ~ :!~h~ ~ ~ ~ ; w i ~I;i~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~llhf;: ~I~ i g J~~~. +- . Cle z::! -u Zz . ~lli" .., l:i~ :g~ ;!- ~ J: en 0 U h .. '" ~ <0 ~ CI <~ Cl a.. 0 ", Z Clz I; Z < .0 ~ en", a.. - W ~ I 0.. ~ 0.. Q ~ '" w U <( ......~ 0..:; I-~ w~ ~u ~~.. <(~ ~~ w " V') < ......... ...... V) .... .... I Z o ~ z <( u :r: z o >- z -<( u W3 w a::~ m~ U~ !I d . ~~ avo~'lv~ CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION TO: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: OCTOBER 16, 2007 PREPARED BY: KIRT A. COURY, PROJECT PLANNER PROJECT TITLE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-13 FOR OUTDOOR DINING AREA TO ACCOMMODATE A FUTURE RESTAURANT LOCATED AT PLANNING AREA NO.4, BUILDING NO. 16 WITHIN THE CANYON HILLS MARKET PLACE APPLICANT: OWNER: MARK RADELOW, SUDBERRY DEVELOMENT, 5465 MOREHOUSE DRIVE, STE. 260, SAN DIEGO, CA 92121 CHMP, LLC, SUDBERRY DEVELOMENT, 5465 MOREHOUSE DRIVE, STE. 260, SAN DIEGO, CA 92121 PROJECT REQUEST The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to allow for an outdoor dining area to accommodate a future restaurant located at retail Building No. 16 within the Canyon Hills Market Place. Review and analysis is pursuant to the Canyon Hills Specific Plan Amendment No.2, Chapter 17.38 (Non-Residential Design Review), and Chapter 17.74 (Conditional Use Permits) of the LEMC. PROJECT LOCATION The project site is located at the southeast corner of Railroad Canyon Road and Canyon Hills Drive, Planning Area No.4; Building No. 16. BACKGROUND In November 2004 the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore approved by resolution the design and establishment of the Canyon Hills Market Place within Planning Areas 3 and 4 of the Canyon Hills Specific Plan. Entitlements granted for Planning Area 4 (which covers AGENDj:\ fJO. II PAGE I OF I e PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-13; FOR OUTDOOR DINING AREA AT BUILDING NO. 16 IN THE CANYON HILLS MARKET PLACE 14 acres) included a Commercial Design Review, two (2) Conditional Use Permits, and a Uniform Sign Program for the Center. At present, there are five (5) remaining vacant lots along Canyon Hills Drive and within Planning Area NO.4. On June 11, 2007 the applicant submitted to the Community Development Department an application for a Conditional Use Permit, which is necessary to ensure that the proposed property use conforms and is consistent with the Canyon Hills Specific Plan. The applicant has worked diligently with staff in resolving issues related to this Conditional Use Permit application. There are no outstanding issues to report. Staff supports the Conditional Use Permit request. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Project Canyon Hills Specific Site Plan North Vacant OS (Open Space) Canyon Hills Specific Plan South Vacant OS (Open Space) Canyon Hills Specific Plan East Multi Family MF2 (PA 4) Canyon Hills Specific Condominiums Plan West Vacant OS (Open Space) Canyon Hills Specific Plan PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is proposing an outdoor dining area that will accommodate a future restaurant located within Building No. 16. Chapter 8.6(c)(M) "Uses Subject to Conditional Use Permit" of the Canyon Hills Specific Plan requires any outside dining area to acquire a Conditional Use Permit. The proposed outdoor dining area is approximately 2,250 square feet and includes tables and chairs, umbrellas, potted plants, seat walls, and decorative flat work (refer to Exhibit C which provides a reduction of the proposed outdoor dining area). Exhibit B presents the location of the outdoor dining area within Planning Area 4. No alcohol use is requested with this permit. The applicant has stated that any potential for future alcohol use will be deferred to the future tenant and subject to the necessary review and permits by the City and the Department of Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC). AGENDt'\. ITEM NO. PAGE d- I , OF {~ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-13; FOR OUTDOOR DINING AREA AT BUILDING NO. 161N THE CANYON HILLS MARKET PLACE ANALYSIS According to the description set forth in Chapter 8.6 (c)(M) "Uses Subject to Conditional Use Permit" of the Canyon Hills Specific Plan, the Conditional Use Permit request is appropriate. Staff believes that the proposed outdoor dining area for Building No. 16 will accommodate and compliment the existing uses within the Canyon Hills Market Place. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Addendum NO.2 to the certified Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse No. 87111606 (the "FEIR") for the Cottonwood Hills Specific Plan was prepared and approved by the City Council in March 2007 to address minor changes associated with Specific Plan Amendment No. 2 to the Cottonwood Hills Specific Plan (renamed the Canyon Hills Specific Plan as part of Specific Plan Amendment No.2). This Conditional Use Permit request and other small corrections like it were contemplated by Specific Plan Amendment NO.2. The Conditional Use Permit request does not present substantial changes or new information regarding the potential environmental impacts that were analyzed in the FEIR or the changes addressed in Addendum No 2. No new CEQA documentation is necessary for the Project. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2007-_ adopting consistency findings with the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and Resolution No._ approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-13 based on the following Findings, Exhibits, and proposed Conditions of Approval. PREPARED BY: KIRT A. COURY, PROJECT PLANNER APPROVED BY: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT~ ATTACHMENTS: 1. VICINITY MAP 2. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS 3. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 4. EXHIBITS . REDUCTIONS (8 % x 11) Exhibit A. Site Plan ACEND/\ lTl:r,'j NO.~_ PAGE 3 OF l e PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 16, 2007 PROJECT TITLE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-13; FOR OUTDOOR DINING AREA AT BUILDING NO. 16 IN THE CANYON HILLS MARKET PLACE Exhibit B. Building No. 16 Outdoor Dining Area Location Exhibit C. Building No. 16 Outdoor Dining Area and Material 5. FULL SIZE PLAN SET AGEN~~~I~Ef4NO. o!'t e ~ ~- ~ 14 m ::J;:, ::>. Z I I- a a % I ~ ~ ::> 0 0 c:.. I ~ ~ % ~ ~ z I 0 0 %: .., z S ~ ~ ~ I :::E 0.. I , . I . ~ . . I . . to . I . - ~ . . . . f-1 . . ~ , u (I) &&J ~ ~ 0 > 1&1 ~ 0:: D.. ~ (I) I- % % &&J ::> D.. 0 c:. ..J % ~ % ~ z ::> j ~ D.. Z . . . -0 . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . a3 .. . . ... . 4 . .......... ....... ... . . . .' . . . cu .. . . ,,- . . . . . . . -.J . . . ............ .....z . . . . . . . oQ w..... -,<( 00 Canyon 0:::0 a....J Hills i>., ~"..i" 11>'0 - J I ~~C.~'II.. .~ PACE.~5 OF .-L8 - RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING FINDINGS THAT THE ENTITLEMENT IS EXEMPT FROM THE MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP) WHEREAS, Sudberry Development has submitted an application for Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-13 (the "Entitlement"), to allow for an outdoor dining area to accommodate a future restaurant located at retail Building No. 16 within the Canon Hills Market Place; and WHEREAS, Section IV(D) of the City of Lake Elsinore's MSHCP Implementing Resolution expressly exempts from the MSHCP: Any project for which and to the extent that vested rights to proceed with the project notwithstanding the enactment of this Resolution exist under the common laws of the State of California, a vesting tentative map pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, a development agreement pursuant to Government Code section 65864 et seq., or other instrument, approved or executed by the City prior to adoption of this Resolution. Projects subject to this exemption must comply with all provisions of any applicable state and federal law. WHEREAS, public notice of the Entitlement has been given, and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on October 16, 2007. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the Project and its exemption from the MSHCP "Plan Wide Requirements" prior to making findings that the project is indeed exempt. SECTION 2. That in accordance with the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code and the MSHCP, the Planning Commission makes the following findings: 1. The Project is a project under the City's MSHCP Resolution, and the City must make an MSHCP Consistency finding before approval. The Entitlement is exempt from the City's MSHCP Resolution. On July 9, 1990, the City and Pardee-Grossman/Cottonwood Canyon entered into that certain development agreement (the "Development Agreement'), which expressly exempted the Developer from responsibility for any new development impact fees. The Development Agreement will expire on July 9, 2010. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE (0 , ( Or- _l 9 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE 2 OF 3 Even though the Entitlement is exempt from the MSHCP, the Developer must comply with other state and federal laws. Consistent with federal law, the applicant had prepared a project-specific Habitat Conservation Plan and has a history of extensive coordination with the wildlife agencies. Where approved for development, the project site has already been graded, cleared, or developed in accordance with the Project HCP. Given the foregoing, no further action regarding the MSCHP is required. 2. The proposed project is subject to the City's LEAP and the County's Joint Project Review processes. See Response #1 above. 3. The proposed project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines. See Response #1 above. 4. The proposed project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines. See Response #1 above. 5. The proposed project IS consistent with the UrbanlWildlands Interface Guidelines. See Response #1 above. 6. The proposed project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements. See Response #1 above. 7. The proposed project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures. See Response #1 above. 8. The proposed project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines. See Response #1 above. 9. The proposed project will be conditioned to pay the City's MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee. Developer is exempt from payment of the City's MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee by virtue of the Development Agreement. 10. The proposed project is consistent with the MSHCP. See Response #1 above. SECTION 3. Based upon the evidence presented, the above findings, and the attached conditions of approval, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council find that the Entitlement is exempt from the MSHCP. AC'2::'DP~ lTi::fJi NO. P",r~ -, 'J"OUt;; , J I OF ('6 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE 3 OF 3 SECTION 4. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of October 2007, by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: Rolfe M. Preisendanz Director of Community Development Michael O'Neal, Chairman Lake Elsinore Planning Commission AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE e II OF (<2> RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007 -13 WHEREAS, Sudberry Development, has initiated proceedings to request the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-13 to allow for an outdoor dining area to accommodate a future restaurant located at retail Building No. 16 within the Canyon Hills Market Place, Planning Area No.4 (the "Entitlement"); and WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elsinore recognizes that certain uses have operational characteristics that, depending upon the location and design of the use, may have the potential to negatively impact adjoining properties, businesses or residents and therefore are permitted subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit, which allows the City to comprehensively review and approve the use; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of considering and approving, conditionally approving, or denying conditional use permits; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Pub. Res. Code 99 21000 et seq.: "CEQA") and the CEQA Guidelines (14 C.C.R. 99 15000 et seq.), public agencies are expressly encouraged to reduce delay and paperwork associated with the implementation of CEQA by using previously prepared environmental documents when those previously prepared documents adequately address the potential impacts of the proposed project (CEQA Guidelines Section 15006); and WHEREAS, CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a) states that "When an EIR has been certified or negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following: 1. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; 2. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or 3. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence AGENDA rrEM NO. PACE 9 I ( OF I~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE 2 OF 5 at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following: (A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration; (B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; (C) 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 project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative."; and WHEREAS, Addendum NO.2 to the certified Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse No. 87111606 (the "FEIR") for the Cottonwood Hills Specific Plan was prepared and approved by the City Council in March 2007 to address minor changes associated with Specific Plan Amendment NO.2 to the Cottonwood Hills Specific Plan (renamed the Canyon Hills Specific Plan as part of Specific Plan Amendment No.2). Said Addendum evaluated environmental impacts that would result from development of the shopping center, which included Building No. 19 where the proposed outdoor dining area will be located; and WHEREAS, the Entitlement does not present substantial changes or new information regarding the potential environmental impacts of development; and WHEREAS, public notice of the Entitlement has been given, and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on October 16, 2007. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the proposed Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-13 prior to rendering its decision and finds that the requirements of Chapter 17.74 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code have been satisfied. . C"'f"'~ '\ IT""Ell IICO II l:;. 'ti"~j.;h c C.., i~ . PAGE~OF_I B PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE 3 OF 5 SECTION 2. The Planning Commission finds and determines that in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, the Entitlement does not present a substantial change or new information that would require further CEQA analysis. The environmental impacts associated with development of the Entitlement were contemplated by Addendum No. 2 to the certified Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse No. 87111606 (the "FEIR") for the Cottonwood Hills Specific Plan and were fully analyzed and mitigated therein. No new CEQA documentation is necessary for the Entitlement. SECTION 3. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning Law, the Canyon Hills Specific Plan Amendment No. 2 and the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, the Planning Commission makes the following findings for approval of CUP 2007-13: 1. The proposed use, on its own merits and within the context of its setting, is in accord with the objectives of the General Plan and the purpose of the planning district in which the site is located. Issuance of this Conditional Use Permit will facilitate the creation of a well balanced and functional mix of residential, commercial, industrial, open space, recreational and institutional land uses. The proposed land use conforms to the objectives of the General Plan and the Canyon Hills Specific Plan Amendment NO.2. 2. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the general health, safety, comfort, or general welfare of persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed use or the City, or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or the City. All applicable City departments and agencies have been afforded the opportunity to review the use permit and their comments have been addressed in the conditions of approval attached to the staff report for this Project. Conditions have been applied relating to the proposed use, so as to eliminate any negative impacts to the general health, safety, comfort, or general welfare of the surrounding neighborhood or the City. 3. The site for the intended use 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 Title 17 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. The proposed outdoor dining area has been designed in consideration of the size and shape of the Project Site, thereby strengthening and enhancing the immediate commercial area. Further, the proposed use will compliment the quality of existing development and will create a visually pleasing, non-detractive relationship between the proposed and existing projects, in that the facility design has been reviewed to ensure adequate provision of screening from the adjacent properties. AGENDA iTEM NO. II PACE --LL- OF -.l ca PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE40F 5 4. The site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways with proper design both as to width and type of pavement to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated by the subject use. The City has adequately evaluated the potential impacts associated with the proposed facility prior to its approval and has conditioned the Project to be served by roads of adequate capacity and design standards to provide reasonable access by car, truck, and emergency services vehicles. 5. In approving the subject use, there will be no adverse affect on abutting property or the permitted and normal use thereof. The Project has been thoroughly reviewed and conditioned by all applicable City departments and outside agencies, eliminating the potential for any and all adverse effects on the abutting property. 6. Adequate conditions and safeguards pursuant to Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Section 17.74.50 have been incorporated into the approval of the Conditional Use Permit to insure that the use continues in a manner envisioned by these findings for the term of the use. Pursuant to Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Section 17.74.050, the proposed outdoor dining area has been scheduled for consideration and approval of the Planning Commission at the regularly scheduled meeting on October 16, 2007. SECTION 4. Based upon the evidence presented, the above findings, and the attached conditions of approval, the Planning Commission hereby approves Conditional Use Permit 2007-13. SECTION 5. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of October 2007, by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Michael O'Neal, Chairman City of Lake Elsinore j~:':'Etml\ ITEM NO. II PAGE / d- OF I ~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE 5 OF 5 ATTEST: Rolfe Preisendanz Director of Community Development AGENDA ITEf~j NO. It PJ~CE /3 OF /9 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-13 FOR OUTDOOR DINING TO BE LOCATED AT BUILDING NO. 16 WITHIN THE CANYON HILLS MARKET PLACE PLANNING General Conditions 1. The applicant shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its Officials, Officers, Employees, and Agents from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City, its Officials, Officers, Employees or Agents to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning the Conditional Use Permit (Outdoor Dining) project attached hereto. 2. The applicant shall place a weatherproof 3' x 3' sign at the entrance to the project site identifying the approved days and hours of construction (7 AM - 7 PM, Monday through Friday with no construction activity to occur on Saturdays, Sundays or legal holidays) activity and a statement that complaints regarding the operation can be lodged with the City of Lake Elsinore Code Enforcement Division (951) 674-3124. The sign shall be installed prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 3. All Conditions of Approval shall be reproduced upon page one of building plans submitted to the Building and Safety Division for Plan Check. 4. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, the applicant shall sign and complete an "Acknowledgement of Conditions," and shall return the executed original to the Community Development Department for inclusion in the case records. 5. The Applicant shall comply with the City's Noise Ordinance. Construction activity shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 AM to 5:00 PM, Monday through Friday, and no construction activity shall occur on Saturdays, Sundays or legal holidays. 6. The proposed location of onsite construction trailers shall be approved by the Director of Community Development or Designee. A cash bond of $1,000.00 shall be required for any construction trailers placed on the site and used during construction. Bonds will be released after removal of trailers and restoration of the site to an acceptable state, subject to the approval of the Director of Community Development or designee. Planning Commission AGENDA !TEM NO. I ( Pp..CE~OF (B 7. The applicant shall comply with all applicable City codes and ordinances. 8. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval associated with the Canyon Hills Market Place and Planning Area NO.4. Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-13 9. The Conditional Use Permit approved herein shall lapse and shall become void one (1) year following the date on which the use permit became effective, unless prior to the expiration of one (1) year a building permit is issued and construction commenced and diligently pursued toward completion on the site. 10. The Conditional Use Permit shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, Title 17 unless modified by approved Conditions of Approval. 11. The Conditional Use Permit granted herein shall run with the land, once said use is established, and shall continue to be valid upon a change of ownership of the site or structure which was the subject of this approval. COMMUNITYSERWCESDEPARTMENT 12. Developer shall comply with all City Ordinances regarding construction debris removal and recycling as per Section 8.32 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 13. The applicant shall comply with all Riverside County Fire Departments requirements and standards. Planning Commission AGENDA iTEM NO.~ PAGE if OF f CJ ~ . ~ ~ ~p I !i II ~ Ii i~ ~ h ~~ ~ ~g ~~ - " ~I i ~~I~I IQ ~ II~i ~ ~ ~ iiU ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~1111!1 ! I II! I ~ I!jl~ : >- .11!.3 ~ z ~~ 8181 (9~ ~l --..- -- ---~.-.--. .-.._~ - .., C) Z is -' 5 'CO ~~ ;;!;;: ~C) wZ 1>..- wZ ~iS ~8 ~~ co z", 82 avo~'lv~ 3 I>.. l!:! en C)o z~ z~ z~ <~ -'z I>..~ . W '" ::> ~ u w ~ J: U '" <0 Cl <~ 1>..0 C)Z CI)~ "<t i1i ~ C) Z Z ~ ~, U jj w ~ I c... ""l:/" ;t:. w U <( ....1< c...Z I-~ w:; ~~ ~~ <(~ ~~ w V)~ ....J~ ....I I z o >- z <( u W3 a::~ ID5 UB IT AGENDA ITEM NO. PACE I Co ~~ 8_ 1P.a~ \!l ~~ ~z ~ z~ .. z~ <~ a .....z 0..;:; 3 ~ a.. "" ~ G i ; -0 ~ B ..., ,~ ~ ....g h 9 ::~ ~ ~ ~~ jj ~ ~ < r I I o @--- -0 ~ c:> Z 15 ..... 5 ."" ~~ ~iii! !::< ~c:> wZ 0..- wZ ~15 ~C5 zO 00 -I- !::::::l 00 Z"" 00 Uu. @--- Eo HISIT Jf I '/5' } w ~ I a.. ~ a.. w U <( .....< a..z "' I-~ w::; ~~ er:::~ <(~ ~~ W W (/')~ ......... ..... I z o >- z <( u W3 IE:~ 109 U~ JOI""N AJ.l ~q pIIllOI'i LOOZ '10...... :aIDP jOld kp'l<lc ""-r\.'''''...-'n,-,~etfm~~\ifEM NO. I f PACE (7 OF~_ ~ ~ I J AGENDAtTEM N~ _~ PAGE-L t? 0 ..,". ..-:.... ~J C)o ' j z:;: ~ ~ -u p Zz z;:; f ~ <~ -,z i ...:; . i w I '" ::> r I- ~ Z u ~ w ~ I- - I a... J: w U a... l5 '" ,- i <0 ,~ s~ t/) " Sd Cl <w , ~ "'0 z "" C)z " . ~. J J: "':; ~'i .0 w U <( ....J Cl.. ~ W ~~ ~; <(~ ~~ u w' (/)'" o ....Jz ....J~ _w :c~ '" -' z o >- z <( u W3 m::~ m~ U~ CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION TO: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT TITLE: OCTOBER 16, 2007 UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM MODIFICATION NO. 2007-07 "LAKE ELSINORE OUTLET STORES" DATE: OWNER: ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN & SIGNS, 2950 PALISADES DRIVE, CORONA, CA 92880 CASTLE & COOKE (ATTN: WILLIAM D. SAMPSON) 1000 STOCKDALE HIGHWAY, BAKERSFIELD, CA 93311 APPLICANT: PROJECT REQUEST Staff is requesting a continuance of the proposed project. BACKGROUND Subsequent to this project being scheduled for hearing, planning staff requested that the applicant provide additional information needed to prepare the staff report. The information was not provided by the applicant as of the printing of this report. Therefore, with the consent of the Planning Commission, staff requests that this item be continued to the November 6, 2007 meeting. PREPARED BY: MATTHEW C. HARRIS, SENIOR PLANNER Iif::-~ APPROVED BY: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ /J}rYr-- DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENDA ITEM I ~ PAGE~OF~