The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCC Reso No 2010-051RESOLUTION NO. 2010-051 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING FINDINGS TO CERTIFY ADDENDUM NO. 3 TO THE FINAL SUPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 87111606) WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Lake Elsinore by Pardee Homes, for the Canyon Hills Specific Plan Amendment No. 3 ("the Project'), located within the Canyon Hills Specific Plan Project Area (the "Site"); and WHEREAS, the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Pub. Res. Code 21000 et seq.: "CEQA") and the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (title 14, Cal. Code Regs. 15000 et seq.: the "CEQA Guidelines") are applicable to discretionary projects, which are defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15357 as "a project which requires the exercise of judgment or deliberation when the public agency or body decides to approve or disapprove a particular activity, as distinguished from situations where the public agency or body merely has to determine whether there has been conformity with applicable statutes, ordinances, or regulations"; and WHEREAS, in January 1989, the City of Lake Elsinore (the "City") certified Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse No. 87111606 (the "FEIR") for the Cottonwood Hills Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, in March 2003, and March, 2007, the City approved the First and Second Amendments to the Specific Plan, which, among other things, changed the name of the Specific Plan to the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, a modified Environmental Checklist was prepared to evaluate whether this Entitlement would result in any new significant impacts or new information necessitating preparation of a subsequent environmental document; and WHEREAS, Section 15164 (a) of the CEQA Guidelines provides that "The lead agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred"; 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; CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2010-051 PAGE 2 OF 4 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 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 sever than shown in the previous EIR; (C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not the 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, public notice of the Entitlement has been given, and the City Council has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on July 27, 2010. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council has considered Addendum No. 3 prepared for the Entitlement. The City Council determines that, based upon the following findings, Addendum No. 3 was prepared in conformance with CEQA and is the appropriate environmental document for the Entitlements: 1. Addendum No. 3 to the FEIR is complete, contains all required information, and has been completed in compliance with CEQA, utilizing criteria set forth in Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines. 2. Addendum No. 3 is the appropriate document because changes and CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2010-051 PAGE 3OF4 modifications proposed by the Entitlements are necessary but do not trigger any of the conditions set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 (see below). 3. The Entitlement does not introduce any new significant environmental effects, nor will they result in any new significant unavoidable project impacts beyond those previously identified in the FEIR. 4. The Entitlement does not propose substantial changes to the project as analyzed under the FEIR, which will require major revisions to the FEIR due to new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant environmental effects. 5. No new information of substantial importance exists, which was either unknown or could not have been known at the time that the FEIR was certified, to show that the Entitlement will have significant effects that were not described in the FEIR, that significant effects that were examined in the FEIR will be more severe as a result of the Entitlement, that mitigation measures or alternatives previously found infeasible would in fact be feasible, or that new mitigation measures are necessary for the Entitlements. SECTION 2. Based upon the foregoing, and based upon all oral and written testimony and other evidence presented, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore adopts Addendum No. 3 to the FEIR. SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of July 2010, by the following vote: MELISSA A. MELENDEZ ` MAYOR A CAROL COWLEY INTERIM CITY CLE CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2010-051 PAGE 4 OF 4 APPROVED AS TO FORM: y""A BARA L IBOLD CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE I, Carol Cowley, Interim City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, hereby certify that Resolution No. 2010-051 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, at a regular meeting held on the 27th day of July 2010, and that the same was adopted by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BUCKLEY, HICKMAN, MAGEE, MAYOR PRO TEM BHUTTA AND MAYOR MELENDEZ NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE CAROL/ COWL o INTERIM CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -059 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL. OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, IN SUPPORT OF PROPOSITION 23 WHEREAS, California's economy is still suffering from a severe economic recession with an unemployment rate of more than 12% with more than two million out of work; and WHEREAS, local governments are facing budget deficits and potential spending cuts as a result of reduced revenues due to the recession; and WHEREAS, California's global warming law (AB 32) would impose significant additional costs on California cities and counties, specifically an up to 60% increase in electricity rates, increased natural gas costs and increased transportation fuel costs; and WHEREAS, AB 32 would also burden many local governments with a new state - mandated fee on some local facilities such as waste - treatment plants, landfills, cogeneration facilities and other operations totaling several billion dollars; and WHEREAS, the increased costs resulting from AB 32 would reduce economic activity and result in more than one million lost jobs; and WHEREAS, the California Air Resources Board and others have determined that AB 32's higher energy costs and job losses will disproportionately impact low- income families and small businesses; and WHEREAS, the reduced economic activity resulting from AB 32 would reduce revenues to local governments and the state which could equal between $2.2 billion to $5.8 billion per year; and WHEREAS, according to the California Air Resources. Board- and. otber experts, the greenhouse gas emission reductions from AB 32 would` have measurable impact on global warming; and _ . WHEREAS, the Proposition 23 would temporarily suspend'AB 32 Until _= such time as the economy recovers, specifically when the unemployment rate.returns.ta 5.5% for four consecutive quarters; and WHEREAS, the Proposition 23 would be a prudent strategy for local governments to avoid higher costs and reduced revenues so that they would have more resources to dedicate for delivering vital public services; and Resolution No. 2010 -059 Page2of3 WHEREAS, according to the independent Legislative Analyst, "During the I� likely suspension of AB 32, state administrative costs to develop and enforce regulations pursuant to AB 32 would be reduced significantly. We estimate that the resulting state administrative cost savings —and ultimately lower fees —could be in the low tens of millions of dollars annually ;" and WHEREAS, according to the independent Legislative Analyst, "The suspension of the proposed cap- and -trade regulations could result in lower energy prices for consumers, including state and local government agencies that are large consumers of energy, than would be the case if AB 32 regulations were allowed to take effect. These lower energy prices, in turn, also would have positive economic impacts on the state ;" and WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elsinore requests that the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and the Western Riverside Council of Governments adopt similar resolutions of support for Proposition 23; and WHEREAS, the Proposition 23 does not have any impact on existing environmental laws in California. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, hereby endorses the Proposition 23 to temporarily suspend implementation of AB 32 (The Global Warming Solutions Act). PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, this 24 day of August, 2010. MELISSA A. MELENDEZ, MAYOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ATT =• CAROL - • Y, CMC '� - •C ITYc.CLERK Resolution No. 2010 -059 Page 3 of 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE SS CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE I, Carol Cowley, Interim City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, hereby certify that Resolution No. 2010 -059 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, at a regular meeting held on the 24 day of August 2010, and that the same was adopted by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BUCKLEY, HICKMAN, MAGEE, MAYOR PRO TEM BHUTTA AND MAYOR MELENDEZ NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE / _ CAROL COWLEr7 ` INTERIM CITY CLERK = :