HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Item No. 10CITY OF
LADE " LSIHOPU
-� DREAM EXTREME.
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR
AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ROBERT A. BRADY
CITY MANAGER
DATE: APRIL 14, 2009
SUBJECT: ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2009 -01; A
MODIFICATION TO MULTIPLE SECTIONS OF THE LAKE
ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE (LEMQ) IN ORDER TO DEFINE
RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY, INSTITUTIONS AND STRUCTURES,
AND TO BROADEN CERTAIN LAND USE DESCRIPTIONS IN
AN EFFORT TO FURTHER COMPLY WITH THE RELIGIOUS
LAND USE AND INSTITUTIONALIZED PERSONS ACT (RLUIPA)
Background
At the regularly scheduled meeting of March 3, 2009, the Planning Commission
unanimously adopted Resolution No. 2009 -21, recommending to the City Council
approval of Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2009 -01 and adoption of the
Negative Declaration thereof; based on the findings made in the Resolution and
attachments to the Staff Report.
Discussion
The Planning Commission heard the staff report (attachment 3) and a presentation from
staff before deliberating on the proposed text amendment. No requests to speak were
submitted and no one in the audience wished to comment on the text amendment,
either in favor or opposed.
The Planning Commission was receptive to the proposed text amendment. The
Planning Commission asked how long staff had been working on the proposed text
amendment. The Commission was notified that staff had been working on the proposed
text amendment for about six (6) weeks.
It was the unanimous decision of the Planning Commission to approve staff's
recommendation that the City Council adopt Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No.
2009 -01 and the Negative Declaration thereof.
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 1 of 81
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2009 -01
April 14, 2009
Page 2 of 2
Fiscal Impact
The proposed text amendment will only amend pertinent subsections of Title 17 of the
LEMC, in order to define religious assembly, institutions and structures, and to broaden
the land use descriptions set forth in the various pertinent subsections to refer to
' assembly, institution, and structures" instead of "churches." The changes
would not modify the overall scope of the existing standards and as such, would require
minimal staff time to administer. There would be minimal fiscal impact to the City
resulting from the administration or enforcement of the ordinance.
Recommendation
First reading of an Ordinance approving of Text Amendment No. 2009 -01 in
order to amend LEMC Sections 17.08.090, 17.08.160, 17.64.030, 17.68.030,
17.72.030, 17.76.020, 17.80.020, 17.84.020, 17.116.030, 17.120.030,
17.124.020, and 17.132.030 of the LEMC, waive further reading; and
2. Adopt a Resolution approving Negative Declaration No 2009 -01.
Prepared By: Justin Carlson
Associate PI er
Approved By: Robert A. Brady,
City Manager
Attachments:
1. City Council Ordinance approving Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2009-
01.
2. City Council Resolution approving Negative Declaration No. 2009 -01.
3. Planning Commission Staff Report with Exhibits dated March 3, 2009.
4. Draft Planning Commission meeting minutes, (dated March 3, 2009).
Page 2 of 2 Agenda Item No. 10
Page 2 of 81
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTIONS
17.08.090, 17.08.160, 17.64.030, 17.68.030, 17.72.030,
17.76.020, 17.80.020, 17.84.020, 17.116.030, 17.120.030,
17.124.020, AND 17.132.030 OF THE LAKE ELSINORE
MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING RELIGIOUS LAND USES
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Laws of the State of California
authorize the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore to adopt ordinances that, among
other things, regulate the use of buildings, structures, and land within the jurisdictional
boundaries of the City and its sphere of influence for industry, business, residences,
and open space; and
WHEREAS, on September 27, 2000, the Religious Land Use and
Institutionalized Persons Act (Pub. L. No 106 -274, 114 Stat. 903 (codified at 42 U.S.C. §
2000cc- 2000c -5): "RLUIPA ") was enacted into federal law to (1) prohibit discrimination
against any religious assembly or institution on the basis of religion when rendering land
use decisions, (2) prohibit the placement of unreasonable limits on religious assemblies,
institutions or structures when rendering land use decisions, and (3) prohibit the
complete exclusion of religious assemblies from a particular jurisdiction when rendering
land use decisions; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore desires to amend
the Lake Elsinore Zoning Code (Title 17) to define religious assembly, institution and
structures, and to broaden certain land use descriptions in an effort to further
compliance with RLUIPA; and
WHEREAS, based on evidence presented by the Community
Development Department and other interested parties at a duly noticed public hearing
on March 3, 2009, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council
approve this ordinance amending sections 17.08.090, 17.08.160, 17.64.030, 17.68.030,
17.72.030, 17.76.020, 17.80.020, 17.84.020, 17.116.030, 17.120.030, 17.124.020, and
17.132.030 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code regarding religious assembly,
institution, and structures; and
WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing, held on April 14, 2009, the
City Council considered the Planning Commission's recommendation and evidence
presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties
regarding the proposed Ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. All amendments to Title 17 shall be reflected by the following
structure: additions are shown in underline and deletions are shown in G �h ^ug
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 3 of 81
SECTION 2. That Section 17.08.090 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code be
amended as follows:
17.08.090 1 definitions.
"Institutional use" means a non - profit or quasi - public use or institution, such as
a sht reh place of religious assembly or institution library, public or private school,
hospital, or municipally owned or operated building, structure or land, used for public
purpose.
SECTION 3. That Section 17.08.160 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code be
amended to add the following definition of `Places of Religious Assembly or Institution"
between the definitions of 'Philanthropic or charitable organization" and 'Planned
residential development' as follows:
17.08.160 P definitions.
"Places of Religious Assembly or Institution" means places of religious
assembly or institution including, but not limited to: churches, mosques, synagogues,
temples, halls, or other structures or land used by people for purposes of religious
exercise.
SECTION 4. That Section 17.64.030(T) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code be
amended as follows:
17.64.030 Uses subject to a conditional use permit.
T. GhWFGhes Places of Religious Assembly or Institution located on a site at least
one (1) acre in size.
SECTION 5. That Section 17.68.030(E) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code be
amended as follows:
17.68.030 Uses subject to a conditional use permit.
E. GhUFGhe6 Places of Religious Assembly or Institution located on a site at least
one (1) acre in size.
SECTION 6. That Section 17.72.030(D) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code be
amended as follows:
17.72.030 Uses subject to a conditional use permit.
D. Ohafehes Places of Religious Assembly or Institution located on a site at
least one (1) acre in size.
SECTION 7. That Section 17.76.020(1) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code be
amended as follows:
-2- Agenda Item No. 10
Page 4 of 81
17.76.020 Permitted uses.
I. Gh mhes Places of Religious Assembly or Institution located on a site at least
one (1) acre in size.
SECTION 8. That Section 17.80.020(K) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code be
amended as follows:
17.80.020 Permitted uses.
K. Ch -rshes Places of Religious Assembly or Institution located on a site at least
one (1) acre in size.
SECTION 9. That Section 17.84.020(K) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code be
amended as follows:
17.84.020 Permitted uses.
K. Chi mhes Places of Religious Assembly or Institution located on a site at least
one (1) acre in size.
SECTION 10. That Section 17.116.030(A) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code
be amended as follows:
17.116.030 Uses subject to a conditional use permit.
A. Ghurshes Places of Religious Assembly or Institution
SECTION 11. That Section 17.120.030(C) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code
be amended as follows:
17.120.030 Uses subject to a conditional use permit.
C. Ghurshes Places of Religious Assembly or Institution
Section 12. That Section 17.124.020(A) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code be
amended as follows:
17.124.020 Permitted uses.
A. Ghurshes Places of Religious Assembly or Institution
SECTION 13. That Section 17.132.030(U) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code
be amended as follows:
17.132.030 Uses subject to a conditional use permit.
-3- Agenda Item No. 10
Page 5 of 81
v:m�� • - • • • • • Fron, • •
Arm
.•
_ ■••
f Mp All 'erg' and ntatn building nnn,in Ann.. rnniiirmm�nto
6.
rlrn Vlnlnn0 fnr shnrnll and nfF_oite nnrLinn
SECTION 14. Severability. If any provision, clause, sentence or paragraph of
this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall be held
invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions of this Ordinance and are
hereby declared to be severable.
SECTION 15. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of
its final passage. The City Clerk shall certify as to adoption of this Ordinance and cause
this Ordinance to be published and posted in the manner required by law.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council
of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, on this 14 day of April 2009.
ROBERT E. MAGEE, MAYOR
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
ATTEST:
DEBORA THOMSEN,
CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
BARBARA LEIBOLD
CITY ATTORNEY
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
-4- Agenda Item No. 10
Page 6 of 81
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss.
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE )
I, DEBORA THOMSEN, Interim City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore,
California, hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. was introduced at
a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore on the day of
, and was finally passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Lake Elsinore held on the day of , by the following roll call
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
DEBORA THOMSEN
CITY CLERK
-5- Agenda Item No. 10
Page 7 of 81
RESOLUTION NO. 2009-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LAKE ELSINORE, ADOPTING NEGATIVE DECLARATION
NO. 2009 -01 FOR ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT
AMENDMENT NO. 2009-01
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Laws of the State of California
authorize the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore to adopt ordinances that, among
other things, regulate the use of buildings, structures, and land within the jurisdictional
boundaries of the City and its sphere of influence for industry, business, residences,
and open space; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend sections 17.08.090,
17.08.160, 17.64.030, 17.68.030, 17.72.030, 17.76.020, 17.80.020, 17.84.020,
17.116.030, 17.120.030, 17.124.020, and 17.132.030 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal
Code (the "Proposed Amendment ") regarding religious assembly, institution, and
structures;
WHEREAS, the Proposed Amendment 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 Proposed
Amendment 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 Proposed Amendment would have a
significant effect on the environment. Based upon the results of that Initial Study, there
was no substantial evidence that the Proposed Amendment 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. 2009 -01; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15073, on January 22,
2009, the City duly issued a notice of intent to adopt the Negative Declaration; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore at a
regular meeting held on March 3, 2009, made its report upon the desirability of the
Proposed Amendment and provided a recommendation to the City Council for adoption
of Negative Declaration (ND) 2009 -01; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, as the lead
agency, has responsibility for adopting negative declarations; and
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 8 of 81
WHEREAS, on April 14, 2009, at a duly noticed public hearing, the City
Council considered evidence presented by the Planning Commission, Community
Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item.
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 evaluated all comments, written and
oral, received from persons who have reviewed the Negative Declaration.
SECTION 2. The City Council has found that the Negative Declaration for
the Proposed Amendment is adequate and has been completed in compliance with
CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's procedures for implementation of
CEQA. The City Council 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 City Council 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 City Council hereby makes, adopts, and incorporates
the following findings regarding the lack of potential environmental impacts of the
Proposed Amendment 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 Proposed Amendment, there is no
substantial evidence suggesting that the Proposed Amendment may 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 a significant effect on the
environment.
Pursuant to the evidence received, and in the light of the whole record presented,
the Proposed Amendment 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.
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 9 of 81
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City
Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, on this 14 day of April 2009.
ROBERT E. MAGEE, MAYOR
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
ATTEST:
DEBORA THOMSEN,
CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
BARBARA LEIBOLD
CITY ATTORNEY
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 10 of 81
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss.
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE )
I, DEBORA THOMSEN, City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, California,
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2009 - was passed at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore held on the 14th day of April by
the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DEBORA THOMSEN
CITY CLERK
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 11 of 81
CITY OF
LADE
LS IIYOIJE
DREAM EXTREME
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
HONORABLE CHAIRMAN
AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
TOM WEINER,
ACTING DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
MARCH 3, 2009
SUBJECT: ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2009-01; A
MODIFICATION TO MULTIPLE SECTIONS OF THE LAKE
ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE (LEMC) IN ORDER TO
DEFINE RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY, INSTITUTIONS AND
STRUCTURES, AND TO BROADEN CERTAIN LAND USE
DESCRIPTIONS IN AN EFFORT TO FURTHER COMPLY
WITH THE RELIGIOUS LAND USE AND
INSTITUTIONALIZED PERSONS ACT (RLUIPA)
APPLICANT: CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE: 130 SOUTH MAIN STREET,
LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530
Purpose
The purpose of this report is to present information to the Planning Commission regarding
the proposed Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment to amend Sections 17.08.090,
17.08.160, 17.64.030, 17.68.030, 17.72.030, 17.76.020, 17.80.020, 17.84:020,
17.116.030,17.120.030,17.124:020, and 17.132.030 (the "Pertinent Subsections ") of the
Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) to define religious assembly, institutions and
structures, and to broaden certain land use descriptions to refer to 'religious assembly,
institution, and structures," instead of "churches" in an effort to further comply with the
RLUIPA (defined below).
Discussion
On September 22, 2000, President Clinton signed into law the Religious Land Use and
Institutionalized Persons Act (Pub. L. No 106 -274, 114 Stat. 903 (codified at 42 U.S.C. §
2000cc- 2000c -5): `RLUIPA "): RLUIPA secures the rights of individuals to pursue and
practice their religious beliefs and provides religious institutions protection from
discrimination by local governments in land use regulations and the processing of
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 12 of 81
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2009 -01
March 3, 2009
Page 2 of 3
applications for the construction of buildings to be used for religious purposes. After
RLUIPA was signed into law, the City of Lake Elsinore made certain revisions to the LEMC
to reflect the new legislation. Currently, the LEMC refers narrowly to "churches" as
permitted and conditionally permitted uses in Title 17. However, the term "church" is very
narrow and does not include other types of religious establishments that RLUIPA protects.
Therefore, Text Amendment No. 2009 -01 will amend the Pertinent Subsections of Title 17
of the LEMC to define religious assembly, institution and structures, and to broaden the
land use descriptions set forth in the various Pertinent Subsections to refer to "religious
assembly, institution, and structures," instead of 'churches" in an effort to further comply
with RLUIPA.
The proposed changes to the Pertinent Subsections are set forth in the attached draft
ordinance. Additions are shown in underline text and deletions are shown in strikeeut text.
Environmental Determination
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study was
completed to analyze the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project. The
Initial Study concluded that the proposed project would have no significant environmental
impacts. A Negative Declaration has accordingly been prepared and released for public
review from January 22, 2009 through February 13, 2009.
The City received four (4) comment letters during the review period. On February 3, 2009,
the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District provided a letterto the
City that they had "no comments" concerning the project or the circulated Negative
Declaration (see attachment 5). On February 5, 2009, the California Department of Fish &
Game (CDFG) provided a letter indicating that the project would not have an impact on
fish, wildlife, and habitat and therefore the project is exempt from the CDFG CEQA filing
fee (see attachment 6). On February 12, 2009, the City of Canyon Lake provided a letterto
the City that they had "no comments" concerning the project or the circulated Negative
Declaration (see attachment 7). On February 17, 2009 the Riverside County Fire
Department provided a letter to the City that they had "no comments" concerning the
project or the circulated Negative Declaration.
Recommendation
a. Adopt a resolution recommending City Council approval of Text Amendment No.
2009 -01 in order to amend Sections 17.08.090, 17.08.160, 17.64.030, 17.68.030,
17.72.030, 17.76.020, 17.80.020, 17.84.020, 17.116.030, 17.120.030,17.124.020,
and 17.132.030 of the LEMC.
Agenda Item No. 1C
Page 13 of 81
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2009 -01
March 3, 2009
Page 3 of 3
Prepared By: Justin Carlson,L
Associate Plan er
Approved By: Tom Weiner,
Acting Director of Community Development
Attachments:
1. Planning Commission Resolution
2. "Draft" Ordinance
3. Negative Declaration and Initial Study
4. Notice of Intent to adopt a Negative Declaration
5. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District "No
Comments' Letter (dated February 3, 2009)
6. California Department of Fish & Game "CEQA Filing Fee No Effect
Determination Form"
7. City of Canyon Lake "No Comments' Letter (dated, February 12, 2009)
8. Riverside County Fire Department "No Comments' Letter (dated February 16,
2009)
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 14 of 81
RESOLUTION NO. 2009-
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVAL OF ZONING
ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2009 -01 AND THE
ADOPTION OF THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION
THEREFORE
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department of the City of Lake
Elsinore has initiated Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2009 -01, which amends
sections 17.08.090, 17.08.160, 17.64.030, 17.68.030, 17.72.030, 17.76.020, 17.80.020,
17.84.020, 17.116.030, 17.120.030, 17.124.020, and 17.132.030 of the Lake Elsinore
Municipal Code (the "Proposed Amendments ") regarding religious assembly, institution,
and structures; and
WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elsinore wishes to provide clear standards
for the establishment and implementation of religious assembly, institution, and
structures, which can be applied throughout the City of Lake Elsinore; and
WHEREAS, on September 27, 2000, the Religious Land Use and
Institutionalized Persons Act (Pub. L. No 106 -274, 114 Stat. 903 (codified at 42 U.S.C. §
2000cc- 2000c -5): "RLUIPA') was enacted into federal law to (1) prohibit discrimination
against any religious assembly or institution on the basis of religion when rendering land
use decisions, (2) prohibit the placement of unreasonable limits on religious assemblies,
institutions or structures when rendering land use decisions, and (3) prohibit the
complete exclusion of religious assemblies from a particular jurisdiction when rendering
land use decisions; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Title 14 of the California Code of
Regulations, Section 15070, the City of Lake Elsinore prepared a proposed negative
declaration to analyze the potential environmental impacts associated with the City's
adoption of Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2009 -01; and
WHEREAS, Section 17.188.050 of the LEMC stipulates that the Planning
Commission render its recommendation on a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment,
including the reasons for the recommendation, to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing, held on March 3, 2009, the
Planning Commission considered evidence presented by the Community Development
Department and other interested parties with respect to this item.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
LAKE ELSINORE CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE, AND
ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 15 of 81
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2009
Page 2 of 5
SECTION 1. The Planning Commission considered the proposed Negative
Declaration before making its recommendation that the City Council approve the
environmental document.
SECTION 2. The Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that
in accordance with Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, section 15070 it was
appropriate to prepare a Negative Declaration for Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment
No. 2009 -01 since the initial study revealed that there was no substantial evidence in
light of the whole record, that the project may have a significant effect on the
environment. The purpose of Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2009 -01 is to
define religious assembly, institution, and structures, and will also broaden certain land
use descriptions to refer to "religious assembly, institution, and structures," instead of
"churches" in an effort to further comply with RLUIPA.
SECTION 3. In accordance with Government Code Section 65855, the
Planning Commission sets forth the following findings for its recommendation that the
City Council approve Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2009 -01:
1. The Proposed Amendments will define religious assembly, institution,
and structures, and will broaden certain land use descriptions to refer to 'religious
assembly, institution, and structures," instead of "churches" in an effort to further comply
with RLUIPA.
2. The Proposed Amendments are consistent with the current General
Plan and will assist in the provision of a well - balanced mix of land uses, including
religious land uses.
3. The Proposed Amendments do not create new districts and do not
exclude religious land uses from any particular zoning district. The Proposed
Amendments simply clarify the definition of religious assembly, institution, and
structures, and revise references made to "churches ". Text Amendment No. 2009 -01 is
not proposing any new zoning districts that would require General Plan /Zoning Code
consistency findings.
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 amend the following sections of the LEMC:
17.08.090 1 definitions.
"Institutional use" means a non - profit or quasi - public use or institution, such as
a Ghurrh place of religious assembly or institution library, public or private school,
hospital, or municipally owned or operated building, structure or land, used for public
purpose.
Agenda Item No. 10
-Page 16 of 81
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2009 -
Page 3 of 5
17.08.160 P definitions.
"Places of Religious Assembly or Institution" means places of religious
assembly or institution including, but not limited to: churches, mosques, synagogues,
temples, halls, or other structures or land used by people for purposes of religious
exercise.
17.64.030 Uses subject to a conditional use permit.
T. Ghumhes Places of Religious Assembly or Institution located on a site at least
one (1) acre in size.
17.68.030 Uses subject to a conditional use permit.
E. GhurGhes Places of Religious Assembly or Institution located on a site at least
one (1) acre in size.
17.72.030 Uses subject to a conditional use permit.
D. Ghurches Places of Religious Assembly or Institution located on a site at
least one (1) acre in size.
17.76.020 Permitted uses.
1. Gh Urshes Places of Religious Assembly or Institution located on a site at least
one (1) acre in size.
17.80.020 Permitted uses.
K. Ghumhes Places of Religious Assembly or Institution located on a site at least
one (1) acre in size.
17.84.020 Permitted uses.
K. GhYFshes Places of Religious Assembly or Institution located on a site at least
one (1) acre in size.
17.116.030 Uses subject to a conditional use permit.
A. Ghurshes Places of Religious Assembly or Institution
17.120.030 Uses subject to a conditional use permit.
C. Places of Religious Assembly or Institution
17.124.020 Permitted uses.
A. GhUrshes Places of Religious Assembly or Institution
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 17 of 81
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2009 -
Page 4 of 5
17.132.030 Uses subject to a conditional use permit.
U. Churches Places of Religious Assembly or Institution located on a site at
least one (1) acre in size
SECTION 5. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of
its passage and adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3 rd day of March 2009.
Axel Zanelli, Chairman
City of Lake Elsinore
ATTEST:
Tom Weiner
Acting Director of Community Development
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 18 of 81
- - - ..
- ...
Oil
- - - . .
SECTION 5. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of
its passage and adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3 rd day of March 2009.
Axel Zanelli, Chairman
City of Lake Elsinore
ATTEST:
Tom Weiner
Acting Director of Community Development
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 18 of 81
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2009 -
Page 5 of 5
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss.
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE )
1, TOM WEINER, Acting Director of Community Development of the City of Lake
Elsinore, California, hereby certify that Resolution No. 2009- was adopted
by the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore at a regular meeting held on
the 3` day of March 2009, and that the same was adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Tom Weiner
Acting Director of Community Development
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 19 of 81
"DRAFT ORDIANCE"
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTIONS
17.08.090, 17.08.160, 17.64.030, 17.68.030, 17.72.030,
17.76.020, 17.80.020, 17.84.020, 17.116.030, 17.120.030,
17.124.020, AND 17.132.030 OF THE LAKE ELSINORE
MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING RELIGIOUS LAND USES
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Laws of the State of California
authorize the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore to adopt ordinances that, among
other things, regulate the use of buildings, structures, and land within the jurisdictional
boundaries of the City and its sphere of influence for industry, business, residences,
and open space; and
WHEREAS, on September 27, 2000, the Religious Land Use and
Institutionalized Persons Act (Pub. L. No 106 -274, 114 Stat. 903 (codified at 42 U.S.C. §
2000cc- 2000c -5): "RLUIPA ") was enacted into federal law to (1) prohibit discrimination
against any religious assembly or institution on the basis of religion when rendering land
use decisions, (2) prohibit the placement of unreasonable limits on religious assemblies,
institutions or structures when rendering land use decisions, and (3) prohibit the
complete exclusion of religious assemblies from a particular jurisdiction when rendering
land use decisions; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore desires to amend
the Lake Elsinore Zoning Code (Title 17) to define religious assembly, institution and
structures, and to broaden certain land use descriptions in an effort to further
compliance with RLUIPA; and
WHEREAS, based on evidence presented by the Community
Development Department and other interested parties at a duly noticed public hearing
on , 2009, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council
approve this ordinance amending sections 17.08.090, 17.08.160, 17.64.030, 17.68.030,
17.72.030, 17.76.020, 17.80.020, 17.84.020, 17.116.030, 17.120.030, 17.124.020, and
17.132.030 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code regarding religious assembly,
institution, and structures; and
WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing, held on , 2009,
the City Council considered the Planning Commission's recommendation and evidence
presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties
regarding the proposed Ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 20 of 81
SECTION 1. All amendments to Title 17 shall be reflected by the following
structure: additions are shown in underline and deletions are shown in str+kethreugh.
SECTION 2. That Section 17.08.090 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code be
amended as follows:
17.08.090 1 definitions.
"Institutional use" means a non - profit or quasi - public use or institution, such as
a ehureh place of religious assembly or institution library, public or private school,
hospital, or municipally owned or operated building, structure or land, used for public
purpose.
SECTION 3. That Section 17.08.160 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code be
amended to add the following definition of 'Places of Religious Assembly or Institution"
between the definitions of "Philanthropic or charitable organization" and 'Planned
residential development' as follows:
17.08.160 P definitions.
"Places of Religious Assembly or Institution" means places of religious
assembly or institution including, but not limited to: churches, mosques, synagogues,
temples, halls, or other structures or land used by people for purposes of religious
exercise.
SECTION 4. That Section 17.64.030(T) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code be
amended as follows:
17.64.030 Uses subject to a conditional use permit.
T. Sh umhes Places of Religious Assembly or Institution located on a site at least
one (1) acre in size.
SECTION 5. That Section 17.68.030(E) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code be
amended as follows:
17.68.030 Uses subject to a conditional use permit.
E. Churches Places of Religious Assembly or Institution located on a site at least
one (1) acre in size.
SECTION 6. That Section 17.72.030(D) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code be
amended as follows:
17.72.030 Uses subject to a conditional use permit.
D. Churches Places of Religious Assembly or Institution located on a site at
least one (1) acre in size.
-2- Agenda Item No. 10
Page 21 of 81
SECTION 7. That Section 17.76.020(1) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code be
amended as follows:
17.76.020 Permitted uses.
I. Ghur -Ghes Places of Religious Assembly or Institution located on a site at least
one (1) acre in size.
SECTION 8. That Section 17.80.020(K) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code be
amended as follows:
17.80.020 Permitted uses.
K. Sh urshes Places of Religious Assembly or Institution located on a site at least
one (1) acre in size.
SECTION 9. That Section 17.84.020(K) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code be
amended as follows:
17.84.020 Permitted uses.
K. ChwG;es Places of Religious Assembly or Institution located on a site at least
one (1) acre in size.
SECTION 10. That Section 17.116.030(A) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code
be amended as follows:
17.116.030 Uses subject to a conditional use permit.
A. Ghurshes Places of Religious Assembly or Institution
SECTION 11. That Section 17.120.030(C) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code
be amended as follows:
17.120.030 Uses subject to a conditional use permit.
C. Ghurshes Places of Religious Assembly or Institution
Section 12. That Section 17.124.020(A) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code be
amended as follows:
17.124.020 Permitted uses.
A. C„urGhes Places of Religious Assembly or Institution
SECTION 13. That Section 17.132.030(U) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code
be amended as follows:
17.132.030 Uses subject to a conditional use permit.
-3- Agenda Item No. 10
Page 22 of 81
Elms 11 -g MW
SECTION 14. Severability. If any provision, clause, sentence or paragraph of
this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall be held
invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions of this Ordinance and are
hereby declared to be severable.
SECTION 15. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of
its final passage. The City Clerk shall certify as to adoption of this Ordinance and cause
this Ordinance to be published and posted in the manner required by law.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council
of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, on this day of 2009.
ROBERT E. MAGEE, MAYOR
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
ATTEST:
CAROL COWLEY,
INTERIM CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
BARBARA LEIBOLD
CITY ATTORNEY
4 Agenda Item No. 10
Page 23 of 81
e w e
.
■.
A.
SECTION 14. Severability. If any provision, clause, sentence or paragraph of
this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall be held
invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions of this Ordinance and are
hereby declared to be severable.
SECTION 15. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of
its final passage. The City Clerk shall certify as to adoption of this Ordinance and cause
this Ordinance to be published and posted in the manner required by law.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council
of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, on this day of 2009.
ROBERT E. MAGEE, MAYOR
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
ATTEST:
CAROL COWLEY,
INTERIM CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
BARBARA LEIBOLD
CITY ATTORNEY
4 Agenda Item No. 10
Page 23 of 81
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 the foregoing Ordinance No. was introduced at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore on the day of
, and was finally passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Lake Elsinore held on the day of , by the following roll call
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
CAROL COWLEY
INTERIM CITY CLERK
-5- Agenda Item No. 10
Page 24 of 81
CITY OF
LADE LSIIYORE
DREA�.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION
130 South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
(95 6 74 - 3124 Voice (951) 47 -1 4 1 9 Fax
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Project Entitlement No(s): Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No 2009 -01
Applicant: City of Lake Elsinore
Address: 130 S. Main Street Lake Elsinore CA 92530
RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES (i.e., any agency that has discretionary approval power over the
project).
City of Lake Elsinore
TRUSTEE AGENCIES (i.e., the California Department of Fish and Game, State Lands
Commission, State Department of Parks and Recreation, and University of California):
Notice Pursuant to Section 21092.5 of the Public Resources Code
A public hearing before the Planning Commission will be held on March 3, 2009 at 6:00 p.m. at the
City of Lake Elsinore Cultural Center, 183 North Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 to consider
this project. At that time, all interested parties are welcome to address the Planning Commission on
this matter.
Prior to the public hearing, the public is invited to submit written comments on the proposed
Negative Declaration to the Planning Division, attention Justin Carlson, Associate Planner, 130
South Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 or phone (951) 674 -3124.
January 23. MCOgenda Item No. 10
stin Carlson, Associate Planner Da(e Page 25 of 81
Project Location: Citywide
CITY OF *44
LADE COLSIROIZE
DREAM EXTREME
INITIAL STUDY/
NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2oo9 -oi
for
Zoning Ordinance TextAmendmentNo. 2009 -01
Prepared By:
City of Lake Elsinore
Community Development Department
13o South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
INITIAL STUDY
Introduction
This Initial Study has been prepared in accordance with relevant provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Pub. Res. Code §§ 2io0o, et seq.: "CEQA ") and the State Guidelines
for Implementation of CEQA (14 Cal. Code Regs §§ 15000 et seq.: "CEQA Guidelines "). According to
Section 15o63(c) of the CEQA Guidelines, the purposes of an Initial Study are to:
i. Provide the Lead Agency (i.e., the City of Lake Elsinore) with information to use as the basis for
deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or Negative Declaration; and
to
2. Enable an applicant or Lead Agency to modify a project to mitigate adverse impacts before an EIR
is prepared, thereby enabling the project to quality for a Negative Declaration or Mitigated
Negative Declaration; and to
3. Assist in the preparation of an EIR, if one is required; and to
4. Facilitate environmental assessment early in the design of a project; and to
5. Provide documentation of the factual basis for the findings in a Negative Declaration or Mitigated
Negative Declaration that a project will not have a significant effect on the environment; and to
6. Eliminate unnecessary EIRs; and to
7. Determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the project.
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 27 of 81
INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Title
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2009 -01
2. Lead Agency Name and Address
City of Lake Elsinore
130 South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, California 92530
3. Contact Person and Phone Number
Justin Carlson, Associate Planner
(951) 6 74 - 3124, ext. 2 95
4. Project Location
Citywide.
5. Project Applicant Name and Address
City of Lake Elsinore
130 South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
6. General Plan Designation(s)
Very Low Density (VLD), Low Density (LD), Low Medium Density (LMD), Medium Density
(MD), Medium High Density (MHD), High Density (HD), Mixed Use (MU), General Commercial
(GC), Commercial Office (CO), Neighborhood Commercial (NC), Tourist Commercial (TC), and
Freeway Business (FB).
7. Zonine
R -R (Rural Residential District), R -E (Estate Single - Family Residential District), R -H (Hillside
Single- Family Residential Development District), R -1 (Single - Family Residential District), R -2
(Medium Density Residential District), R -3 (High Density Residential District), C -O (Commercial
Office District), C -1 (Neighborhood Commercial District), C -2 (General Commercial District),
and C -M (Commercial Manufacturing District).
8. Description of Project
The City of Lake Elsinore (City) is proposing to modify Sections 1 7. 0 8.090,17.o8.160,17.64-030,
17.68.030, 17.72.030, 17.76.020, 17.80.020, 17.84.020, 17.116.030, 17.120.030, 17.124.o2o, and
17.132.030 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) in order to define religious assembly,
institution and structures, and to broaden certain land use descriptions in an effort to further
compliance with Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (Pub. L. No 1o6 -274, 114
Stat. 903 (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 200occ- 200oc -5): "RLUIPA ").
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting
Varies by location as Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 20o9 -o1 applies to the R -R, R -E, R -H,
R -i, R -2, R -3, C -O, C -1, C -2, and the C -M Zoning Districts.
10.
None.
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 28 of 81
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at
least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or as indicated by the checklist on the
following pages.
❑
Aesthetics
❑ Agricultural Resources
❑
Air Quality
❑
Biological Resources
❑
Cultural Resources
❑
Geology /Soils
❑
Hazards&Hazardous
❑
Hydrology/Water Quality
❑
Land Use /Planning
Materials
❑
Mineral Resources
❑
Noise
❑
Population /Housing
❑
Public Services
❑
Recreation
❑Traffic
❑
Utilities /Service Systems
❑
Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
® I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
❑ I find that although the project could have a significant effect on the environment there will not be a
significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made or agreed to by the
project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact' or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain
to be addressed.
❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because
all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant
to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that
are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
: 2;
Signature
January 22, 2009
Date
Justin Carlson
Print Name
Associate Planner
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT EVALUATION CHECKL Agenda Item No. 10
Page 29 of 81
i. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the
impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault
rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project- specific
factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to
pollutants, based on a project- specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site,
cumulative as well as project - level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as
operational impacts.
3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the
checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant
with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is
substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially
Significant Impact' entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the
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
briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from
"Earlier Analyses," cited in support of conclusions reached in other sections may be cross -
referenced).
5. Earlier analyses maybe used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process,
an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section
15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a. Earlier Analysis Used — Identify and state where they are available for review.
b. Impacts Adequately Addressed — Identify which effects from the above checklist were
within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis..
c. Mitigation Measures —For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or
refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site - specific
conditions for the project
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources
for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared
or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the
statement is substantiated.
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or
individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8. The explanation of each issue should identify: a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used
to evaluate each question; and b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to
less than significance.
Item No. 10
ae30of81
A. AESTHETICS
Potentially
Less Than
Significant
Significant
With
Significant No Impact
Would the project:
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
i. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
❑
❑
❑
2. Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a ❑ ❑ ❑
state scenic highway ?)
3. Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality. of the site and its
surroundings ?) ❑ ❑ ❑
4. Create a source of substantial light or glare,
which would adversely affect day or nighttime ❑ ❑ ❑
views in the area?
B. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES* Potentially Less Than Less Than
Significant Significant Significant N
Would the project: Impact With Impact Impact
Mitigation
5. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland,
or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared
pursuant to the Farmland .Mapping and❑ ❑ ❑ 0
Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use?
6. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
❑ El El use, or a Williamson Act contract?
7. Involve other changes in the existing
environment, which, due to their location or❑ El E l nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to nonagricultural use?
* In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental
effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model (1999) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an
optional model to use in assessing impacts on agricultural and farmland.
C. AIR QUALITY*
Would the project:
Potentially Less Than
Significant Significant
Impact Mitigation
Less Than No
Significant Impact
mpact
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 31 of 81
C. AIR Q UALTTY Potentially
Less Than Less Than
Significant
Would the project: Impact
Significant Significant
With Impact
No
Impact
Mitigation
8. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
❑
the applicable air quality plan?
❑ ❑
g. Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air❑
❑ ❑
quality violation?
10. Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non - attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality❑
❑ ❑
standard (including releasing emissions
which exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors)?
11. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
❑
El El
concentrations ?)
12. Create objectionable odors affecting a❑
El El
number of people ?)
* Where available, the significant criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following
determinations.
D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Potentially
Significant
Would the project: Impact
13. Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local or❑
regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by
the California Department of Fish and Game
or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
14. Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
15. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (including, but not
❑
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
Less Than Less Than
Significant Significant No Impact
Mitigation
With Impact
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
Agenda Item No. 10
-- Page 32 of 81
D.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Potentially
Less Than Less Than
Significant
Significant Significant
No Impact
Would the project: Impact
Mitigation
Impact
16.
Interfere substantially with the movement of
any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native
❑
❑
El
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
17.
Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree❑
❑
❑
preservation policy or ordinance?
18.
Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other❑
❑
❑
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
E.
CULTURAL RESOURCES Potentially
Less Than
Significant
Less than
Significant
gn
With
Significant
No Impact
Would the project: Impact
Mitigation
Impact
19.
Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined[:]
❑
❑
in Sectionl5o64.5?
20.
Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource❑
❑
❑
pursuant to Section15064.5?
21.
Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique❑
❑
❑
geological feature?
22.
Disturb any human remains, including those[]
El
El
outside of formal cemeteries?
F. GEOLOGYANDSOILS
Would the project:
23. Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk
of loss, injury, or death involving:
Less Than
Potentially Significant
Significant Impact With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant No
Impact Impact
❑ ❑ ❑
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 33 of 81
F. GEOLOGYAND SOILS
Would the project:
Less Than
Potentially Significant
Significant Impact With
Mitigation
a. Rupture. of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist -Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on❑
other substantial evidence of known fault?
Refer to Division of Mines and Geology
Special Pub. 42.
b. Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑
c. Seismic - related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
d. Landslides? ❑
24. Result in substantial soil erosion, or the loss of
topsoil? ❑
25. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in
on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse ❑
26. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18 -I -B of the Uniform Building Code❑
(1994), creating substantial risks to life or
property?
27. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative waste
water disposal system where sewers are not
available for the disposal of waste water? ❑
Less than No
Significant Impact
mpact
❑ ❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑ ❑
I
`Ira
PI
G. HAZARD AND HAZARD
MATERIALS Potentially Less Than Less than
Significant
Significant nth Significant No Impact
Would the project: Impact Mitigation Impact
28. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport,[] ❑ ❑
use or disposal of hazardous materials?
29. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
up -set and accident conditions involving the❑ ❑ ❑
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 34 of 81
G. HAZARD AND HAZARD
MATERIALS Potentially Less Than Less than
Significant Significant Significant No Impact
Would the project: Impact Mitigation Impact
30. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one - quarter mile of an existing❑ ❑ ❑
or proposed school?
31. Be located on a site which is included on a list
of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a ❑ El
significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
32. For a project located within an airport land use
Less Than
plan or, where such a plan has not been
Potentially
Significant
adopted, within two miles of a public airport
Lessthan
Si gnificant No
Would the piOJCCt:
or public use airport, would the project result
❑
❑
in a safety hazard for people residing or
tion
working in the project area?
discharge requirements?
El
33• For a project within the vicinity of a private
El
airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the
El
El
project area?
34• Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency[:]
❑
❑
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
35. Expose people or structures to a significant
risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland
fires, including where wildlands are adjacent❑
❑
❑
to urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
H. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALM
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Significant
Lessthan
Si gnificant No
Would the piOJCCt:
Impact
With
Im P aact Impact
36. Violate any water quality standards or waste
tion
discharge requirements?
El
1:1
El
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 35 of 81
,H. HYDROLOGYAND WATER QUALITY Less Than
Potentially Less than
Sign Significant N
Would the project: I pct With Significant pact
Mitigation
3�. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net deficit
in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level (e.g., the production❑ ❑ El rate of preexisting nearby wells would drop to a
level which would not support existing land
uses or planned uses for which permits have
been granted)?
38. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern
of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river, or
substantially increase the rate or amount of ❑ ❑ ❑ M
surface runoff in a manner which would result
in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -
site?
39• Create or contribute runoff water, which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm
water drainage systems or provide substantial ❑
El
El
additional sources of polluted runoff?
40. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑
❑
❑
M
41. Place housing within a loo -year flood hazard
area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard
or Flood Insurance Rate Map or ❑
El
El
other flood hazard delineation map?
42. Place within a loo -year flood hazard area
structures which would impede or redirect❑
❑
❑
M
flood flows?
43• Expose people or structures to a significant risk
of loss, injury or death involving flooding,
El
including flooding as a result of the failure of a
El
levee or dam?
44. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ❑
❑
❑
M
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING Potentially
Less Than
Less than
Significant
Would the project: Impact
Wi t
Significant
No Impact
Mitigation
Imp act
p
45• Physically divide an established community? ❑
❑
❑
M
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 36 of 81
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING Potentially
Less Than Less than
Significant
Significant
W Significant No Impact
Would the project: Impact
Mitigation Impact
46.Conflict with any applicable land use plan,
Impact
policy, or regulation of an agency with
Mitigation
jurisdiction over the project (including, but not
limited to the general plan, specific plan, local❑
❑ ❑
coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
❑
environmental effect?
47. Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural community❑
❑ ❑
conservation plan?
J. MINERAL RESOURCES Potentially
Less Than Less than
Significant
Would the project: Impact
Significant Si No
With I Significant Impact
Mitigation
48.Result.in the loss of availability of a known
❑
mineral resource that would be of value to the❑
❑ ❑
region and the residents of the state?
49. Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site
❑ ❑ N
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan❑
or other land use plan?
K. NOISE Potentially
Less Than
Significant
Less than
NO
Significant
Would the project result in: Impact
With
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
50. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise
levels in excess of standards established in the
❑
❑
local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
51. Exposure of persons to or generation of
excessive ground -borne vibration or ground -❑
❑
❑
borne noise levels?
52.A substantial permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels❑ ❑ ❑
existing without the project?
53• A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity❑ ❑ ❑
above levels without the project?
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 37 of 81
K. NOISE Potentially
Less Than
Less than
S
Significant Would the project result in: Impact
With Significant Significant No
Impact
Significant
With
Miigation Impact
54 For a project located within an airport land use
Mitigation
plan or, where such a plan has not been
area, either directly (for example, by proposing
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or
❑
public use airport, would the project expose ❑
❑ ❑
people residing or worldng in the project area to
example, through an extension of roads or other
excessive noise levels?
❑
55• For a project .located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip, would the project expose❑
residing or worldng in the project area to
❑ El
excessive noise levels?
❑
L. POPULATION AND HOUSING Potentially
Less Than
❑
Significant
Would the project: Impact
Significant
With
Less than
Significant No
Impact
56. Induce substantial population growth in an
Mitigation
Impact
area, either directly (for example, by proposing
61. Schools?
❑
new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for❑
❑
❑
example, through an extension of roads or other
❑
❑
infra- structure)?
6 3. Other public facilities?
57. Displace substantial numbers of existing
❑
❑
housing, necessitating the construction of❑
❑
❑
replacement housing elsewhere?
58. Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement❑
❑
❑
housing elsewhere?
M. PUBLIC SERVICES*
Potentially Less Than Less than
Would the project result in substantial adversesignificant Significant No Impact
physical impacts to the following: Impact Mitigation Impact
59• Fire protection?
❑
❑
❑
6o. Police protection?
❑
❑
❑
61. Schools?
❑
❑
❑
62. Parks?
❑
❑
❑
6 3. Other public facilities?
❑
❑
❑
* I l d
nc u e potential effects associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services.
A`gMlWallum No. 10
Page 38 of 81
N. RECREATION
64. Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial❑
physical deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
65. Does the project include recreational facilities
or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities, which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
O. TRANSPORTATION /TRAFFIC Potentially
Significant
Would the project: Impact
66. Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial
in relation to the existing traffic load and
capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a
substantial increase in either the number of
vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on
roads, or congestion at intersections)?
67. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a
level of service standard established by the
County congestion management agency for
designated roads or highways?
68.Result in a change in traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in El
location that results in substantial safety risks?
69. Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
❑
equipment)?
70. Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑
71. Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑
72. Conflict with adopted policies, plans or
programs supporting alternative transportation❑
(e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
P. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:
Less Than Less than
Significant Significant No
With Impact Impact
Mitigation
Potentially
Significant
Impact
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
Less Than Less than
Significant
With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact
❑ ❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
Potentially Less Than
Significant Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Less than No
Significant t
ImpactAgend aYte No. 10
Page 39 of 81
P. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Potentially
Less Than
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
With
Significant
Impact
Impact
p
_ Would the pr0]eet:
Mitigation
73. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of
the applicable Regional Water Quality Control❑
❑
❑
Board?
74. Require or result in the construction of new
water or wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the construction❑
❑
❑
of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
75. Require or result in the construction of new
storm water drainage facilities or expansion of
❑ El El existing facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental effects?
76. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the project from existing entitlements and
❑ El El resources, or are new or expanded entitlements
needed?
77. Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider, which serves or may serve
the project that it has adequate capacity to serve❑ ❑ ❑
the project's projected demand in addition to
the provider's existing commitments?
78. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project's solid❑ ❑ ❑
waste disposal needs?
79. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes
❑ ❑
and regulations related to solid waste?
Q. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF Potentially
SIGNIFICANCE Significant
Impact
80.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 rare or endangered plant
or animal or eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
Less Than Less than
Significant Significant No
With
Mitigation Impact Impact
❑ ❑
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 40 of 81
Q. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF- potentially Less Than Less than
SIGNIFICANCE Significant Wi th t Significant Impact
Impart Mitigation pact m p
81. Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project
❑ El ❑
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)?
82.Does the project have environmental effects,
which will cause substantial adverse effects on❑ ❑ ❑
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
-End of Environmental Impact Evaluation Checklist -
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 41 of 81
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT EVALUATION DISCUSSION
The following is a discussion of the potential impacts associated with the approval of the text
amendment revising Sections 17.o8.ogo, 17.o8.16o, 17.64.030, 17.68.o3o, 17.72.030, 17.76.o2o,
17.80.020, 17.84.020, 17.116.030, 17.120.0$0, 17.124.02o, and 17.132.030 of the Lake Elsinore
Municipal Code (LEMC) in order to define religious assembly, institution and structures, and to
broaden certain land use descriptions in an effort to further compliance with RLUIPA.
The City analyzes the direct and indirect environmental impacts of all projects as they are submitted
for review. When future applicants request the approval to permit religious assembly, institution, and
structures in said districts, all necessary environmental review will be addressed on a project -by-
project basis as needed.
Explanations for each of the checked boxes in the above Environmental Impact Evaluation Checklist
are provided for each item below.
A. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
1) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista
No Impact: This text amendment to define religious assembly, institution and structures, and
to broaden certain land use descriptions in an effort to further compliance with RLUIPA is
procedural only and would not result in any environmental impacts. There are no development
proposals or ground - disturbing activities included as part of this text amendment. Specific to
aesthetics issues, the revisions of the LEMC sections above regarding the permitting of religious
assembly, institution, and structures would not impact scenic vistas or scenic resources degrade
the existing visual character or quality of a site, nor would it create a new source of light or
glare.
The City analyzes the direct and indirect environmental impacts of all projects as they are
submitted for review. When future applicants request the approval to permit religious
assembly, institution, and structures in said districts, all necessary environmental review will be
addressed on a project -by- project basis as needed and required by CEQA
2)
No Impact: See A -1 above.
3) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?
No Impact: See A -1 above.
4)
No Impact: See A -1 above.
Mitigation Measures for Aesthetics None. Agenda Item No. 10
Page 42 of 81
B. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the
California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (
prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to
use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project:
5)
No Impact: This text amendment to define religious assembly, institution and structures, and
to broaden certain land use descriptions in an effort to further compliance with RLUIPA is
procedural only and would not result in any environmental impacts. There are no development
proposals or ground - disturbing activities included as part of this text amendment. Specific to
agricultural resources, the permitting of religious assembly, institution, and structures in said
districts would not result in the conversion of any farmland to a non - agricultural use, nor would
it conflict with existing agricultural zoning or a Williamson Act contract.
The City analyzes the direct and indirect environmental impacts of all projects as they are
submitted for review. When future applicants request the approval to permit religious
assembly, institution, and structures in said districts, all necessary environmental review will be
addressed on a project -by- project basis as needed and required by CEQA.
6) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract?
No Impact: See B -5 above.
7)
No Impact: See B -5 above.
Mitigation Measures for Agricultural Resources None.
C. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the
applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied
upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
8) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air aualitu In an?
No Impact: This text amendment to define religious assembly, institution and structures, and
to broaden certain land use descriptions in an effort to further compliance with RLUIPA is
procedural only and would not result in any environmental impacts. There are no development
proposals or ground- disturbing activities included as part of this text amendment. Specific to
air quality issues, the permitting of religious assembly, institution, and structures in said
districts would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the South Co���94�y No. 10
Management Plan. Further, this amendment to allow for religious assembly, ins itutiM9043 of 81
structures in said districts . would not violate and air quality standard, result in cumulative
increases in criteria pollutants, affect sensitive receptors, nor would it result in the creation of
objectionable odors.
The City analyzes the direct and indirect environmental impacts of all projects as they are
submitted for review. When future applicants request the approval to permit religious
assembly, institution, and structures in said districts, all necessary environmental review will be
addressed on a project -by- project basis as needed and required by CEQA
9)
No Impact: See C -8 above.
10)
precursorsl!
No Impact: See C -8 above.
11) Rose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
No Impact: See C -8 above.
12) Create obiectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
No Impact: See C -8 above.
Mitigation Measures for Air Quality Impacts None.
D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project.
13)
No Impact: This text amendment to define religious assembly, institution and structures, and
to broaden certain land use descriptions in an effort to further compliance with RLUIPA is
procedural only and would not result in any environmental impacts. There are no development
proposals or ground - disturbing activities included as part of this text amendment. Specific to
biological resources, the permitting of religious assembly, institution, and structures would not
result in any effects on listed species, would not allow for habitat modifications, would have no
effect on sensitive communities or wetlands, wildlife movement, local biological policies, nor
conflict with any regional habitat conservation plan.
The City analyzes the direct and indirect environmental impacts of all projeh�99gflJ4e e No• 10
Page 44 of 81
14)
No Impact: See D -13 above.
15)
No Impact: See D -13 above.
16)
No Impact: See D -13 above.
17)
No Impact: See D -13 above.
18)
No Impact: See D -13 above.
Mitigation Measures for Biological Resources None
E. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
19) Cause a substantial. adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as de ned in
CEQA Guidelines Sectioni o6a 5
No Impact: This text amendment to define religious assembly, institution and structures, and
to broaden certain land use descriptions in an effort to further compliance with RLUIPA is
procedural only and would not result in any environmental impacts. There are no development
proposals or ground - disturbing activities included as part of this text amendment. Specific to
cultural resources, the permitting of religious assembly, institution, and structures would not
result in any adverse changes to historical resources, archaeological resources, paleontological
resources, or human remains. Agenda Item No. 10
Page 45 of 81
submitted for review. When future applicants request the approval to permit religious
assembly, institution, and structures in said districts, all necessary environmental review will be
addressed on a project -by- project basis as needed and required by CEQA.
The City analyzes the direct and indirect environmental impacts of all projects as they are
submitted for review. When future applicants request the approval to permit religious
assembly, institution, and structures in said districts, all necessary environmental review will be
addressed on a project -by- project basis as needed and required by CEQA.
20) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to CEOA Guidelines SectionzSO64.17 ?
No Impact: See E -19 above.
21)
No Impact. See E -i9 above.
22) Disturb ant human remains including those interred outside of formal cemeteries
No Impact, See E -t9 above.
Mitigation Measures for Cultural Resources None.
F. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
23)
a.) Rupture of a known earthquake fault as delineated on the most recent Alquist -Pnolo
Publication 42.
No Impact: This text amendment to define religious assembly, institution and structures,
and to broaden certain land use descriptions in an effort to further compliance with RLUIPA
is procedural only and would not result in any environmental impacts. There are no
development proposals or ground- disturbing activities included as part of this text
amendment. Specific to geology and soils, this text amendment allowing for religious
assembly, institutions, and structures in said districts would not expose people or structures
to the risk of loss, injury, or death, would not expose people of structures to seismic ground
shaking, seismic - related ground failure, or landslides. Further, this text amendment would
not result in the loss of topsoil, does not result in placing a project on a geologic unit or soil
that is unstable or expansive, and does not involve any use of septic systems.
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 46 of 81
The City analyzes the direct and indirect environmental impacts of all projects as they are
submitted for review. When future applicants request the approval to permit religious
assembly, institution, and structures in said districts, all necessary environmental review
will be addressed on a project -by- project basis as needed and required by CEQA.
b.) Strong seismic ground shaking?
No Impact: See F -23 (a) above.
c.) Seismic - related ground failure including liquefaction?
No Impact: See F -23 (a) above.
d.) Landslides?
No Impact: See F -23 (a) above.
24) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
No Impact: See F -23 (a) above.
25)
No Impact: See F -23 (a).
26)
No Impact. See F -23 (a) above.
27)
No Impact: See F -23 (a) above.
Mitigation Measures for Geology and Soils None.
G. HAZARD AND HAZARD MATERL S. Would the project:
28) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport
use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Agenda Item No. 10
No Impact. This text amendment to define religious assembly, institution and struct'Mg of 81
to broaden certain land use descriptions in an effort to further compliance with RLUIPA is
procedural only and would not result in any environmental impacts. There are no development
proposals or ground - disturbing activities included as part of this text amendment. Specific to
hazards and hazardous materials, this text amendment does not involve any hazardous
materials or work within an airport or airstrip, would not interfere with any emergency
response or evacuation plan, nor would it expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires.
The City analyzes the direct and indirect environmental impacts of all projects as they are
submitted for review. When future applicants request the approval to permit religious
assembly, institution, and structures in said districts, all necessary environmental review will be
addressed on a project -by- project basis as needed and required by CEQA.
29)
environment?
No Impact: See G -28 above.
30) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutelzi hazardous materials substances
or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
No Impact: See G -28 above.
31)
No Impact: See G -28 above.
32)
No Impact: See G -28 above.
33)
No Impact: See G -28 above.
34) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation 1p any
No Impact: See G -28 above.
35)
Jo. 10
of 81
intermixed with wildlands?
No Impact: See G -28 above.
Mitigation Measures for Hazards and Hazardous Materials None.
H. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
36) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
No Impact: This text amendment to define religious assembly, institution and structures, and
to broaden certain land use descriptions in an effort to further compliance with RLUIPA is
procedural only and would not result in any environmental impacts. There are no development
proposals or ground - disturbing activities included as part of this text amendment. Specific to
hydrology and water quality, this text amendment allowing for religious assembly, institutions,
and structures in said districts would not violate any water quality or waste discharge
requirements, would not deplete groundwater supplies nor interfere with groundwater
recharge, would not alter any drainage pattern not alter the course of stream or river, nor would
this text amendment result in an increase in surface run -off not erosion /siltation. Further, this
text amendment would not result in actions that could exceed the capacity of storm water
drainage systems nor provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff, would not
degrade water quality, would not place people or structures within ioo -year flood hazard areas,
would not result in flooding, and would not result in inundation by seiche, tsunami, nor
mudflow.
The City analyzes the direct and indirect environmental impacts of all projects as they are
submitted for review. When future applicants request the approval to permit religious
assembly, institution, and structures in said districts, all necessary environmental review will be
addressed on a project -by- project basis as needed and required by CEQA.
37)
(4ruiueu u
No Impact: See H -36 above.
38)
suer
No Impact: See H -36 above.
39) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned
storm water drainages sy stems or provide substantial additional sources of pollu &M m No. 10
Page 49 of 81
No Impact: See H -36 above.
40) Otherwise substantially; degrade water quality
No Impact. See H -36 above.
41)
No Impact: See H -36 above.
42) Place within a zoo -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect 17nod
fl ows?
No Impact: See H -36 above.
43)
No Impact: See H -36 above.
44) Inundation by seiche tsunami or mudflow�
No Impact: See H -36 above.
Mitigation Measures for Hydrology and Water Quality None.
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
45) Physically divide an established community?
No Impact: This text amendment to define religious assembly, institution and structures, and
to broaden certain land use descriptions in an effort to further compliance with RLUIPA is
procedural only and would not result in any environmental impacts. There are no development
proposals or ground - disturbing activities included as part of this text amendment. Specific to
land use, this text amendment would not divide an established community, would not conflict
with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation, nor would it conflict with any applicable
regional habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan.
The City analyzes the direct and indirect environmental impacts of all projects as they are
submitted for review. When future applicants request the approval to permit religious
assembly, institution, and structures in said districts, all necessary environmental review will be
addressed on a project -by- project basis as needed and required by CEQA.
Agenda Item 10
Page 50 of 81
46)
Less Than Significant Impact: See I -45 above.
47) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation
plan?
No Impact: See I -45 above.
Mitigation Measures for Land Use None.
J. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
.:
No Impact: This text amendment to define religious assembly, institution and structures, and
to broaden certain land use descriptions in an effort to further compliance with RLUIPA is
procedural only and would not result in any environmental impacts. There are no development
proposals or ground - disturbing activities included as part of this text amendment. Specific to
mineral resources, this text amendment would not result in the loss of mineral resources.
The City analyzes the direct and indirect environmental impacts of all projects as they are
submitted for review. When future applicants request the approval to permit religious
assembly, institution, and structures in said districts, all necessary environmental review will be
addressed on a project-by-project basis as needed and required by CEQA.
49)
No Impact: See J -48 above.
Mitigation Measures for Mineral Resources None.
K. NOISE. Would the project result in:
50)
No Impact. This text amendment to define religious assembly, institution and structures, and
to broaden certain land use descriptions in an effort to further compliance with RLUIPA is
procedural only and would not result in any environmental impacts. There are no development
proposals or ground - disturbing activities included as part of this text amendment. Specific to
noise, this text amendment would not result in the generation of noise in exceSsA&hb*4fiWNo. 10
Page 51 of 81
standards, would not result in excessive groundborne vibration or noise levels, would not result
in a temporary or permanent increase in. ambient noise levels, nor is the project within an
airport land use plan area or within the vicinity of a private airstrip.
The City analyzes the direct and indirect environmental impacts of all projects as they are
submitted for review. When future applicants request the approval to permit religious
assembly, institution, and structures in said districts, all necessary environmental review will be
addressed on a project -by- project basis as needed and required by CEQA.
51) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne
noise levels?
No Impact: See K -5o above.
52)
No Impact: See K -5o above.
53)
No Impact: See K -5o above.
54)
No Impact. See K -5o above.
55)
No Impact: See K -5o above.
Mitigation Measures for Noise None.
L. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
56)
idrastructure)?
No Impact. This text amendment to define religious assembly, institution and structures, and
to broaden certain land use descriptions in an effort to further compliance with RLUIPA is
procedural only and would not result in any environmental impacts. There are no devel spent
proposals or ground - disturbing activities included as part of this text amendme 9 Went No. 10
Page 52 of 81
population and housing, this text amendment would not result in substantial population
growth, nor would it result in the displacement of people or housing.
The City analyzes the direct and indirect environmental impacts of all projects as they are
submitted for review. When future applicants request the approval to permit religious
assembly, institution, and structures in said districts, all necessary environmental review will be
addressed on a project -by- project basis as needed and required by CEQA.
57)
No Impact: See L -56 above.
58) Displace substantial numbers of people necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
No Impact: See L -56 above.
Mitigation Measures for Population and Housing None.
M. PUBLIC SERVICES.
59 - 63) Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities?
No Impact: This text amendment to define religious assembly, institution and structures, and
to broaden certain land use descriptions in an effort to further compliance with RLUIPA is
procedural only and would not result in any environmental impacts. There are no development
proposals or ground - disturbing activities included as part of this text amendment. Specific to
public services, this text amendment would not result in any impacts to fire or police protection,
schools, parks or other public facilities.
The City analyzes the direct and indirect environmental impacts of all projects as they are
submitted for review. When future applicants request the approval to permit religious
assembly, institution, and structures in said districts, all necessary environmental review will be
addressed on a project -by- project basis as needed and required by CEQA.
Mitigation Measures for Public Services None.
N. RECREATION
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 53 of 81
64)
occur or be accelerated?
No Impact: As mentioned above, this text amendment would not result in impacts to parks.
6 5)
No Impact: Refer to responses M -59 and M -64 above.
Mitigation Measures to Recreation None.
O. TRANSPORTATION /TRAFFIC. Would the project:
66)
No Impact: This text amendment to define religious assembly, institution and structures, and
to broaden certain land use descriptions in an effort to further compliance with RLUIPA is
procedural only and would not result in any environmental impacts. There are no development
proposals or ground- disturbing activities included as part of this text amendment. Specific to
transportation /traffic, this text amendment would not result in any increase in traffic, nor
would it exceed a level of service standard or change traffic patterns. Further, this text
amendment would not increase traffic hazards, would not result in inadequate emergency
access or parking capacity, nor would it conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation.
The City analyzes the direct and indirect environmental impacts of all projects as they are
submitted for review. When future applicants request the approval to permit religious
assembly, institution, and structures in said districts, all necessary environmental review will be
addressed on a project -by- project basis as needed and required by CEQA
67)
No Impact: See 0 -66 above.
68) Result in a change in traffic patterns including either an increase in traffic levels or a change
in location that results in substantial safety risks
No Impact: See 0 -66 above.
69)
Agenda Item No. 1 C
Page 54 of 81
No Impact: See 0 -66 above.
70) Result in inadequate emergency access?
No Impact. See 0 -66 above.
71) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
No Impact: See 0 -66 above.
72) Contlict with adonted policies plans or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.9
bus turnouts, bicycle racks)
No Impact: See 0 -66 above.
Mitigation Measures for Traffic None.
P. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
73) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control
Board?
No Impact: This text amendment to define religious assembly, institution and structures, and
to broaden certain land use descriptions in an effort to further compliance with RLUIPA is
procedural only and would not result in any environmental impacts. There are no development
proposals or ground - disturbing activities included as part of this text amendment. Specific to
utilities and service systems, this text amendment would not result in the need for new or
expanded water /wastewater treatment nor storm drain facilities. This text amendment does
not result in the need to evaluate water supply, wastewater treatment, landfill capacity, or
compliance with solid waste regulations.
The City analyzes the direct and indirect environmental impacts of all projects as they are
submitted for review. When future applicants request the approval to permit religious
assembly, institution, and structures in said districts, all necessary environmental review will be
addressed on a project -by- project basis as needed and required by CEQA.
74)
environmental effects?
No Impact. See P -73 above.
75)
No Impact: See P -73 above.
Agenda Item No. 1C
Page 55 of 81
76)
No Impact: See P -73 above.
77)
the provider's existing commitments?
No Impact. See P -73 above.
'%]
No Impact: See P -73 above.
79) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
No Impact: See P -73 above.
Mitigation Measures for Utilities None.
Q. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
M
No Impact: This text amendment to define religious assembly, institution and structures, and
to broaden certain land use descriptions in an effort to further compliance with RLUIPA is
procedural only and would not result in any environmental impacts. This text amendment
involves changes to the Municipal Code with no physical development activity that could affect
biological resources. Therefore, the proposed amendment will have no impact on any sensitive
plant or animal species nor habitat or populations. Likewise, there will be no impacts to any
examples of major periods of California history or prehistory.
81)
No Impact: This text amendment to define religious assembly, institution and structures, and
to broaden certain land use descriptions in an effort to further compliance with RLUIPA is
procedural only and would not result in any environmental impacts. This tea No. 10
involves changes to the Municipal Code with no physical development activity P ;06 of 81
Does the project have impacts that are individuall but cumulatiuelu considerahle?
in any impacts considered project - specific or cumulative.
82)
No Impact. This text amendment involves changes to the Municipal Code with no physical
development activity that could directly or indirectly affect human beings.
-End of Environmental Impact Evaluation Discussion -
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 57 of 81
REFERENCES FOR ENIVRONMENTAL EVALUATION
The following references were utilized during preparation of this Initial Study.
i. City of Lake Elsinore General Plan.
2. City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, as amended.
Agenda Item No. 1C
Page 58 of 81
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTIONS 17.08.090,
17.08.160, 17.64.030, 17.68.030, 17.72.030, 17.76.020, 17.80.020,
17.84.020, 17.116.030, 17.120.030, 17.124.020, AND 17.132.030
OF THE LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING
RELIGIOUS LAND USES
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Laws of the S f California authorize
the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore to adopt ces that, among other
things, regulate the use of buildings, structures, an within the jurisdictional
boundaries of the City and its sphere of influence f u usiness, residences,
and open space; and
WHEREAS, on September 27, the Religious d Use and
Institutionalized Persons Act (Pub. L. No 1 114 Sta 903 (codifi 42 U.S.C. §
2000cc- 2000c -5): "RLUIPA ") was enacted i deral 1 (1) prohibit rimination
against any religious assembly or institution on religion when rendering land
use decisions, (2) prohibit the place ent of unrea a limits on religious assemblies,
institutions or structures when land us cisions, and (3) prohibit the
complete exclusion of religious ass a pai jurisdiction when rendering
land use decisions; and
WHEREAS, the ncil of f L sinore desires to amend the
Lake Elsinore Zoni ode e 17) fine religious assembly, institution and
structures, and oaden c in Ian se descriptions in an effort to further
compliance with A; and
WH ba - evi a nted by the Community Development
Depart r in ed parties at a duly noticed public hearing on
2009 Plan n m n recommended that the City Council approve this
ordi a amending 'ons 8.090, 17.08.160, 17.64.030, 17.68.030, 17.72.030,
17.76. 17.80.020, 020, .116.030, 17.120.030, 17.124.020, and 17.132.030
of the ; Elsinore M ipal Code regarding religious assembly, institution, and
WHEREAT 1y noticed public hearing, held on , 2009, the City
Council consider a Planning Commission's recommendation and evidence
presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties
regarding the proposed Ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. All amendments to Title 17 shall be reflected by the following
structure: additions are shown in underline and deletions are shown in str+ket#Feugh.
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 59 of 81
SECTION. 2. That Section 17.08.090 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code be
amended as follows:
17.08.090 1 definitions.
"Institutional use" means a non - profit or quasi - public use or institution, such as
a shush place of religious assembly or institution library, public or private school,
hospital, or municipally owned or operated building, structure or land, used for public
purpose.
SECTION 3. That Section 17.08.160 of the
amended to add the following definition of "Places of
between the definitions of "Philanthropic or charit
residential development" as follows:
17.08.160 P definitions.
"Places of Religious Assembly c
assembly or institution including, but not Ii
temples, halls, or other structures or land
exercise.
SECTION 4. That Section 1
amended as follows:
17.64.030 UseNfe. o a
T. l
one (1) acre in
17
one (1)
located on a site at least
SECTION °_erection 17.72.030(D) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code be
amended as follows
17.72.030 Uses subject to a conditional use permit.
D. Ghufehes Places of Religious Assembly or Institution located on a site at
least one (1) acre in size.
SECTION 7. That Section 17.76.020(1) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code be
amended as follows:
use
rore Municipal Code be
Assembly or Institution"
ration" and "Planned
eans placdWf religious
mosques, synagogues,
for purposes of religious
Municipal Code be
located on a site at least
of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code be
conditional use permit.
Agenda Item No. 10
- 2 - Page 60 of 81
17.76.020 Permitted uses.
I. OhuFGhes Places of Religious Assembly or Institution located on a site at least
one (1) acre in size.
SECTION 8. That Section 17.80.020(K) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code be
amended as follows:
17.80.020 Permitted uses.
K. Charshes Places of Religious Assembly or Institu c ated on. a site at least
one (1) acre in size. �.
SECTION 9. That Section 17.84.020(K) of
amended as follows: a,
17.84.020 Permitted uses.
K. Sharshes
one (1) acre in size.
SECTION 10. That
be amended as follows:
17.116.030 Uses sqg ct to a
0
Municipal Code be
located on Ysite at least
ke Elsinore Municipal Code
SECTION hat Se 17.120. C) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code
be amended as folio
to a conditional use permit.
Ii n 12. That ' tion 1'�.124.020(A) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code be
amended a: lows:
17.124. X a fed uses.
A. Gharshes aces of Religious Assembly or Institution
SECTION 13. That Section 17.132.030(U) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code
be amended as follows:
17.132.030 Uses subject to a conditional use permit.
-3- Agenda Item No. 10
Page 61 of 81
Q
SECTION 14. Severability. If any
this Ordinance or the application thereof to
invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the
hereby declared to be severable.
SECTION 15. This Ordit
its final passage. The City Clerk
this Ordinance to be oublished a
PASSED,
of the City of Lak
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
BARBARA LEIBOLD
CITY ATTORNEY
m
sentence
of
;ircumstance Mall be held
of this Ordinance and are
days after the date of
Ordinance and cause
by law.
at a regular meeting of the City Council
day of 2009.
ROBERT E. MAGEE, MAYOR
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 62 of 81
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 the foregoing Ordinance No. was introduced at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore on the day of
, and was finally passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Lake Elsinore held on the day of the following roll call
vote:
AYES:
INTERIM CITY CLERK
Agenda Item No. 10
5 - Page 63 of 81
City OF A
LAKE OLS1110KE
D1tEAM EXTREM&
NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY AND INTENT TO ADOPT —
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
TO: RECIPIENT
SUBJECT: NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY AND INTENT TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION FOR THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT
NO. 2009 -01
Lead Agency:
City of Lake Elsinore
130 South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
Contact: Justin Carlson, Associate Planner
The City of Lake Elsinore will be the Lead Agency and has prepared an Initial
Study /Negative Declaration (IS /ND) for the above - referenced project. We are
requesting input from your agency regarding information, which is germane to your
agency's statutory responsibilities in connection with the proposed project. A copy of
the IS /ND, including project description, location, and the potential environmental
effects, is either contained in the attached materials or is available for your review at the
following location:
• City of Lake Elsinore Planning Department, 130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore
A 20 -day review and comment period for this IS /ND is provided under state law. The
20 -day review period is in compliance with Section 15105(b) of the CEQA Guidelines.
Please send your comments to Justin Carlson, Associate Planner at the address shown
above, and they must be received by February 13, 2009. In your response, please
provide your name or the name of a contact person in your agency.
Project Title: Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment 2009 -01
Project Location: City-wide as appropriate.
190 '�atg 'St..t, X.L c ev{ 92530 (909) 674 -3129 fax: (gog) 6 7Agwla Item No. 10
Page 64 of 81
I
Project Description: The City of Lake Elsinore (City) is proposing to modify Sections
17.o8.ogo,17.o8.16o, 17.64.030,17.68.030, 1 7.72. 030 ,17.76.o2o,17.80.020,17.84.020,
i7 .u6.o3o,17.120.030,17.124.o2o, and 17.132.030 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code
(LEMC) in order to define religious assembly, institution and structures, and to broaden
certain land use descriptions in an effort to further compliance with Religious Land Use
and Institutionalized Persons Act (Pub. L. No 1o6 -274, 114 Stat. 903 (codified at 42
U.S.C. § 200occ- 200oc -5): "RLUIPA").
Tentative Hearing Date(s): Planning Commission hearing March 3, 2009; City
Council hearing to be determined.
We look forward to receiving your comments.
Signature:
Name: Justin Carlson
Title: Associate Planner
Date: January 22, 2009
Telephone: (951) 6 74 - 3 12 4 eXt 2 95
130'S oath --M"in �ExecF, Ln,�e �riirs"ic, ed{ 92530 • Sr.[ZP --: (9 6 74 - 3 12 4 5as: (9 6 74 - 23 2
agenda Item No. 1C
Page 65 of 81
WARREN D. WILLIAMS
General Manager -Chief Engineer
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD
AND WATER CONSERVATION
February 3, 2009
Mr. Justin Carlson
Associate Planner
City of Lake Elsinore
130 South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
Dear Mr: Carlson:
1995 MARKET STREET
RIVERSIDE, CA 92501
951.955.1200
FAX 951.788.9965
w .rctlood.org
'ECEIVED
FEB 4 2009
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
PLANN DIVISION
Re: Notice of Intent to Adopt a
Negative Declaration for the
Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2009 -01
This letter is written in response to the Notice of Intent (NOI) to Adopt a Negative Declaration (ND)
for the Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment 2009 -01. The proposal is to modify portions of the Lake
Elsinore Municipal Code regarding religious land uses in the city of Lake Elsinore.
The Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District has no comments at this time.
Thank you for the opportunity to review the IS. Please forward any subsequent environmental
documents regarding the project to my attention at this office. Any questions concerning this letter
may be referred to me at 951.955.8581.
Very truly yours,
M(i = "U .
Attn: David Mazes
KF:mcv
P8 \123569
/� L -
KRIS FLANIG
Senior Civil En neer
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 66 of 81
FROM :DEPT OF FISH & GAME ONTAF FAX NO. :9094812945 Feb. 05 2009 05:47PM P2
xate of �au tQrD1 . _ the _ources Agenc ARf D SCHWARTENECCER.
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
http://www.dfg.ca.gov
Environmental Review and Permitting
1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1260
Sacramento, California 95814
CEQA Filing Fee No Effect Determination Form
Applicant Name: City of Lake .Elsinore (Attu: Justin Carlson)
Date Submitted: 1 -30 -2009
Applicant Address: 130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
Project Name: Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2oo9 -oi
CEQA Lead Agency: City of Lake Elsinore
CEQA Document Type: Negative Declaration (ND)
SCH Number and /or local agency !D number: Local Agency ID number is same
as project name above. There are no Responsible or Trustee Agencies;
therefore ND was not sent to SCH.
Project Location: City -wide as appropriate
Brief Project Description: The City of Lake. Elsinore (City) is proposing to modify
Sections 17.08,090, 17.o8.16o, 1.7.64.030, 17.68.030, 17.72.030, 17. 76.020, 17.80.020,
17.84.020, 17.116.030, 17.120.030, 17.124.o2o, and 17.132.030 of the Lake Elsinore
Municipal Code (LEMC) in order to define religious assembly, institution and
structures, and to broaden certain land use descriptions in an effort to further
compliance with Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (Pub. L. No io6-
2 74, 11 4 Stat. go3 (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 200occ- 200oc - 5): "RLUIPA ").
Determination: Based on a review of the Project as proposed, the Department of Fish
and Game has determined that for purposes of the assessment of CEQA filing fees
[F &G Code 711.4(c)] the project has no potential effect on fish, wildlife and habitat and
the project as described does not require payment of a CEQA filing fee. This
determination does not in any way imply that the project is exempt from CEQA and
does not determine the significance of any potential project effects evaluated pursuant
to CEQA.
Please retain this original determination for your records; you are required to file a copy
of this determination with the County Clerk after your project is approved and at the time
of filing of the CEQA lead agency's Notice of Determination (NOD). If you do not file a
copy of this determination with the County Clerk at the time of filing of the NOD, the
appropriate CEQA filing fee will be due and payable.
Conserving California's WiCdCfe Since .1870
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 67 of 81
FROM :DEPT OF FISH & GAME ONTAF FAX NO. :9094812945 Feb. 05 2009 05:47PM P3
Without a valid No Effect Determination Form or proof of fee payment, the project will
not be operative, vested, or final and any local permits issued for the project will be
invalid, pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)(3).
Issued By: 1C�2� I R O fZg Z � l Date: -S -. Q 9
Title: & i nwe.n
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 68 of 81
RE: General Plan update for the Downtown and County Club Heights area Page 1 of 1
Justin Carlson
From: Alfredo Garcia [agarcia @cityofcanyonlake.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2009 12:21 PM
To: Justin Carlson
Subject: Negative Declaration
Justin,
The City of Canyon Lake received your letter dated January 26, 2009 regarding the Notice of availability and intent to adopt a
negative declaration for the zoning ordinance text amendment No. 2009 -01.
The City of Canyon Lake appreciates your request for our input, however, at this time we do not have any comments relating to the
Lake Elsinore area.
Thank you
Alfredo Garcia
City of Canyon Lake
Planning Intern
Agenda Item No. 10
Page 69 of 81
2/17/2009
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
FIRE DEPARTMENT
In cooperation with the
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
210 West San Jacinto Avenue • Perris, California 92570 • (909) 940 -6900 • Fax (909) 940 -6910
Proudly serving the
February 16, 2009
unincorporated
areas of Riverside
City of Lake Elsinore
County and the
Cities of:
Planning Dept.
Justin Carlson, Associate Planner
Banning
130 Main Street
Beaumont
Lake Elsinore, CA 925
4.
Calimesa
RE:, Notice of Availability and Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration for Zoning
Canyon Lake
Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2009 -01
e.
Coachella
Desert Hot Springs
With respect to the referenced project, the Riverside County Fire Department has no
further comments.
Indian Wells
Indio
Sincerely,
0.
Lake Elsinore
La Quinta
Jason Neuman
0.
Fire Captain
Moreno Valley
Strategic Planning
Palm Desert
Riverside County Fire Department
_ Perris
'
(951) 940 -6349
Rancho Mirage
San Jacinto
Temecula
Board of Supervisors
Bob Buster,
District 1
John Tavaglione,
District 2
Jeff Stone,
District 3
Roy Wilson,
District
Agenda Item No. 10
Marion Ashley,
Districts
Page 70 of 81
John R. Hawkins
Fire Chief
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
183 NORTH MAIN STREET
LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530
TUESDAY, MARCH 3, 2009
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Zanelli called the meeting to order at 6:01
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Commissioner Mendoza led the Pledge of Allegianc
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: CHAIRMAN ZANELLI
VICE - CHAIRMAN FLORE;
COMMISSIONER GONZA
COMMISSIONER MENDO
COMMISSIONER O'NEAL
ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT
Also presenf" were ,, ctmg , munity "Development Director Weiner, Deputy City
Attorney, Winterswy` ublic�Uorks Director /City Engineer Seumalo, Planning
Consultant, Miller, Assog Planner °'Carlson, Associate Planner Resendiz, and Office
None
1. Minutes from the following Planning Commission Meeting(s)
a. December 16, 2008
b. January 6, 2009
c. February 3, 2009
Recommendation: Approve as submitted. Agenda Item No. 10
p of 81
2. Minor Design Review of a Single- Family Residence located 811 W. Sumner Avenue
Recommendation: Adopt a resolution approving the proposed Minor Design Review
of a Single - Family Residence located at 811 W. Sumner Avenue.
VICE - CHAIRMAN
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
that the City Council Adopt findings that the
lt with='the MSHCP, and
W approving Conditional Use Permit No
p approving Variance No. 2007 -06, and
in recommending City Council approvs
-04.
opened the Public Hearing at 6:03 p.m.
2007-22, and
Planning Consultant Miller provided the Commission with an overview of the project.
She noted an additional Condition to be added which she numbered as 43b and
read into the record as follows:
43b: Pursuant to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the applicant shall conduct a pre -
construction survey for nesting birds if any tree removal work is undertaken during
the nesting season which occurs between February 15 and August 30. Agenda Item No. 10
Agenda Item No. Pag 72 of 81
Pn aP ? of 11
The following vote resulted:
It was moved by Commissioner O'Neal, and seconded by Commissioner Mendoza
to adopt Resolution No. 2009 -16 approving a Minor Design Review for a two -story
Single - Family Dwelling Unit located at 811 W. Sumner Avenue and approve the
December 16, 2008, January 6, 2009 and February 3, 2009 Planning Commission
Planning Consultant Miller advised the Commission that she received a call from
John Clemens, a resident of Lake Elsinore who spoke in opposition of the project.
She indicated this project was continued from the January 20, 2009, Planning
Commission meeting which the applicant requested to apply for a Variance due to
the proposed Palomar Street setback. She stated that the applicant is proposed a
landscape setback between five (5) to eighteen (18) feet at which the East Lake
Specific Plan requires thirty feet. However, she stated the applicant is also providing
additional landscaping planters along the northern and eastern boundaries which
should make up closely to the requirements for landscaping along Palomar. She
stated that staff supports the request due to the physical cgostraints of the Alquist
Priolo Special Studies Zone that restricts 100 foot norl4buildable area that runs
through the entire area. She indicated staff supportslthe project based on the
Findings and is subject to the Conditions of Approval,, Shea „vised the Commission
that the applicant is resent and available to answer an
pp p y que ons the Commission
may have.��
Chairman Zanelli requested the applicant tffipproach the podium.
Mike Dunn applicant of the project stated that fi'e his'b'est to desigrfthe project in
M
a way that it would fit in with the neighborhood H �`�sstated to the Commission that he
would be available to answer any questions the Corsion may have.
Chairman Zanelli requested comments from the public t��pLak either for or against
r a0
the project. � � a�
John Treese resident spoke in opposition of the project. He indicated he sent the
entire Commission an emakoutlining akissues with the project. He spoke of the
amount of open s�� merci I space, traffic Issues and the types of vehicles that
speed on the roaapuested any irLfoimation on how to mitigate the traffic
issues. �� . �. ..�
Treese;�e, ent "apolte in opposition of the project and addressed her
with the tra lb issues` 06
Christine U,Ilerich spoke of her concerns with the safety issues particularly with the
street crossing across ,from the elementary school. She noted the project is a
beautiful project,., however, would not recommend having the project placed there
and hopes that qq Commission would reconsider.
Chairman Zanelli requested Public Works Director /City Engineer Seumalo to
respond to the traffic concerns.
Public Works Director /City Engineer Seumalo indicated he went out to the site with
the City's Traffic Engineer and measured lane lines and configuration of the area.
He confirmed that the turns were tight especially when driving a large vehicle. He
stated the Traffic Engineer suggested having the lane re- stripped which is noted in
Condition of Approval number 75. He further suggested having a truck turning
Agenda Item No. 10
Agenda Item No. Pag 73 of 81
Paor'i of 11
template on the corner to insure that the vehicles using this site are able to stay in
their own lane.
Chairman Zanelli closed the Public Hearing at 6:23 p.m. and brought the discussion
back to the dais for Commissioners comments.
Commissioner O'Neal pointed out that his name is misspelled in the staff report.
He stated the project is a good project however, is the wrong type of project for the
area. He indicated that Residential -1 is the wrong type of designation for this piece
of property. He spoke of how he doesn't understand why,tiis project needs to go
A " ,.
through the CUP process as this is the wrong type of designation for this property
and why can't this property be re- zoned. He suggted that a Specific Plan
Amendment would be the correct way to go and it shouI 't be the applicant's fault
that this has been zoned incorrectly all this time.
Acting Community Development Director ,,Weiner" responded to Commissioner
O'Neal's comments. He indicated the�ecific P��n would be ca�dered the
stronger approach in terms of getting the lan�use del ration change He pointed
0
out to the Commission that a letter was receive ,�P, ember of 2000'from the prior
Planning Manager which set the course for the pra]c
Commissioner O'Neal pointed out th`atathe, comments did'not ; address the notion that
the CUP process is outside the scope of what should be thee.
Chairman Zanelli
flexibility for situat
that it is hTs uriderslar��0g that the CUP does allow
i>�,as this Droiect.
that this i6*problem that could easily be corrected.
take to have the project re- zoned.
Acting' Community
Amendment, staff v5i
require trip project to
anything else
guidelines. H
street to get to
,Director Weiner replied, for a Specific Plan
onduct some environmental studies which would
and would take some time.
stated that it is a good project and he would not know of
developed on that parcel due to the noted 2000 hour
:d the traffic issues and the small children crossing the
Commissioner Mendoza pointed out that he thought the 2000 hours was just a
guideline. He spoke of shifting the wall and asked if it would cause any concerns
with the turning of vehicles?
Acting Community Development Director Weiner replied that it is the setback that is
deficient. He stated that the internal circulation should not be effected.
Agenda Item No. 10
Agenda Item No. Pag 74 of 81
PAOP. d of 11
Commissioner Mendoza spoke of the hours of human occupancy which would be
minimal and the noted fault line that has been addressed. He noted that the project
is good and there really isn't anything else that could be developed there.
Vice - Chairman Flores spoke of the traffic issues and asked about the "No Parking"
signs between Corydon onto Palomar.
Public Works Director /City Engineer Seumalo replied that he did not notice the
signs.
Vice - Chairman Flores suggested that the Conditions of Approval should state that
there should not be parking allowed from the corner of Corydon onto the entrance of
the facility due to the traffic issues and should be plan' d a"'
419kly as possible.
Public Works Director /City Engineer Seumalo "dicatad he dis"` sed the situation
with the Traffic Engineer and noted that Vices hairman Flores is confect. He stated
that parking would be prohibited from Co `� on to the project entr ace, and signs
shall be posted along the opposite side of s�freet
Vice - Chairman Flores asked if the re- stripping of tike street could be done prior to
construction.,..
Public Works Director /City Engine' Seurrtalo indicated that it would be at the
Commission's discretion.
.� \tip
Vice - Chairman Flores`a k ddd Acting Comtnunity Development Director Weiner if the
fault line also goes�thro ghN \the park
Acting Community'Development Director Weiner replied that he believes the fault
line runs all the way to thefake ��,
Chairman Zaneli - requested the Commissions attention to Condition number 75
z �.
yyhich� calls for an electronicd�r speed sign that shall be installed on Palomar
Street H indicated i there as never been a time where the City has required a
developerao provide traf{jc safety equipment such as this and indicated that he does
not feel that. the applicaht should be burdened with this cost. He stated that he
agrees that the:sign should be placed there due to the speeding problem, but the
applicant should : nof be responsible for the cost and suggested to strike that
Condition of Approval. He concurred with the Commission that the project is a good
project; however; nothing else could be built there.
Public Works Director /City Engineer Seumalo noted that Condition number 93
addresses that it includes the projects frontage for Corydon and Palomar.
Commissioner O'Neal concurred with Chairman Zanelli on striking Condition number
73 and wanted to emphasis that the process is important.
There being no further discussion, Chairman Zanelli requested a motion Agenda Item No. 10
Agenda Item No. Pag 75 of 81
Paor. S of 11
A motion was made by Commissioner Mendoza and seconded by Commissioner
Gonzales to adopt Resolution No. 2009 -17, recommending that the City Council
adopt Findings that the project known as a self storage and recreational vehicle
storage facility is consistent with the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan
(MSHCP) to include the additional Condition of Approval No. 43b, amend Condition
of Approval No. 43 to 43a, adding Condition No. 43b, and modify Condition of
Approval No. 75 and 93.
The following vote resulted:
AYES: CHAIRMAN ZANELLI
VICE - CHAIRMAN FLORES
COMMISSIONER GONZAL
COMMISSIONER MEND02
NOES: COMMISSIONER O'
ABSENT: NONE
►_vl;�r_�nri�r•�ai�
A motion was made by Commis§k
Gonzales to adopt Resolution No
2007 -22, including the additional C
additional Condition o proval No.
43a, adding Conditigfhzw g4, b, and n
The following
N FLORES
R GONZALES
R MENDOZA
ISSIONER O'NEAL
E
ABSTAIN: NONE
,,,RRcpnded by Commission
Conditional Use Permit No.
tal No. 43b, to include the
Jition of Approval No. 43 to
Approval No. 75 and 93.
A motion was made by Commissioner Gonzales and seconded by Commissioner
Mendoza to adopt Resolution No. 2009 -19, approving Variance No. 2007 -06, to
include the additional Condition of Approval No. 43b, amend Condition of Approval
No. 43 to 43a, adding Condition No. 43b, and modify Condition of Approval No. 75
and 93.
Agenda Item No. 10
Agenda Item No. Pag 76 of 81
Pnap. 6 of 11
The following vote resulted:
AYES: CHAIRMAN ZANELLI
VICE - CHAIRMAN FLORES
COMMISSIONER GONZALES
COMMISSIONER MENDOZA
NOES: COMMISSIONER O'NEAL
ABSENT: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
A motion was made by Commissioner Mendoza an"l seco"n"d, d by Commissioner
Gonzales to adopt Resolution No. 2009 2Q re''1 %, endind to° the City Council
approval of Industrial Design Review No. 200T 04 to include the atlditional Condition
of Approval No. 43b, amend Condition of Approval No. 43 to 43a, addin g Condition
No. 43b, and modify Condition of Approval and ,93
The following vote resulted:
AYES: CHAI
VICE
NER'O'NEAL
Zanelli requested a robbss at 6:49 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at
M
Act (RLUIPA).
Recommendation: Adopt a resolution recommending City Council approval of Text
Amendment No. 2009 -01 in order to amend Sections 17.08.090, 17.08.160,
17.64.030, 17.68.030, 17.72.030, 17.76.020, 17.80.020, 17.84.020, 17.116.030,
17.120.030, 17.124.020, and 17.132.030 of the LEMC.
Agenda Item No. 10
Agenda Item No. Pag 77 of 81
Pnap7nf11
Chairman Zanelli opened the Public Hearing at 6:51 p.m.
Associate Planner Carlson provided the Commission with the reading of the Staff
Report regarding the proposed Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment. He stated at
the present time our City's code defines our religious assembly as churches. He
indicated that this Text Amendment would broaden the land use description set forth
in the various Pertinent Subsections to refer to as "religious assembly, institution
and structures" in an effort to further comply with RLUIPA. He indicated that
pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) an Initial Study was
completed to analyze the potential environmental impact gk4he proposed project.
He indicated a Negative Declaration was prepared and3 released for the public
review on January 22, 2009 and continued through February 13, 2009. He indicated
that staff recommends approving Text Amendment No 2009 -01 and further stated
that he would be available to answer any questiorts th, t the Co'� ission may have.
Chairman Zanelli requested any public
comments either for or against the pi
Hearing at 6:53 p.m. and brought the diE
comments.
Commissioner Mendoza had no
Vice - Chairman Flores asked how
fents on this item. There being no
Chairn I T n Zanelli closed.,,the Public
n back to the dais for Commissioners
"itv been W. rkina on this.
Associate Planner Carlson replied
about 1 '/z months.; \....
he is
amenf t has been in the works for
he lives in a country that allows for
religious diversity.
'
Al
Chairr�larrZarielllhad no c ments mvs
T+ +here` emg no additional con, �ertms, Chairman Zanelli requested a motion.
A motion as made by Commissioner O'Neal and seconded by Commissioner
Mendoza'to .adopt Resolution No. 2009 -21, recommending to the City Council
approval of Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2009 -01 and the adoption of the
Negative Declaration therefore.
The following vote resulted:
AYES: CHAIRMAN ZANELLI
VICE - CHAIRMAN FLORES
COMMISSIONER GONZALES
COMMISSIONER O'NEAL
COMMISSIONER MENDOZA
NOES: NONE Agenda Item No. 10
Agenda Item No. Pag 78 of 81
PaoaRnf11
ABSENT: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
BUSINESS ITEM(S)
None
STAFF COMMENTS
Public Works Director /City Engineer Seumalo commented,on the following:
• He spoke of the re- paving project along Dexter Aven ; e and a = t el ates awarding the
at the City Council meeting on March 24
project y g df first meetW �n April 2009.
• He spoke of the interchange project at CentrafA venue. He noted the retaining walls
and lanes are being re- configured in order to commence construct( on on the
northerly side. Commissioner O'Neal expressed t6., ublic Works! °Director /City
Engineer Seumalo that he experienced a foUrte'en minute wait " time at the
intersection of Gunnerson and Riverside Drive a 3 "Indicated that he appreciates all
the effort to resolve this issue Public. Works Director /City Engineer Seumalo replied
that he has been reviewing the stimulus package to see if.;there is any available
funding for the City to use Chaifmsn`"nelli asked Public Works Director /City
y�����
Engineer Seumalo the status of taking ove pct tfoI on Highway 74 through -out the
City. Public Works Director /City Engineer, $eumMUoJhdicated that the City is stalled
due to Cal Trans and the negotiation of funds. He indicated the best scenario would
u
be approximatelyN04 months from any a provals. Chairman Zanelli spoke of the
flooding along "3 e, DrivpUbrid asked if there are any plans for improvements.
Public Works Direc�� Cit gin.eer Seum alo indicated that there are several
agencies responsible e co diiiph of <th�e road way. He stated that EVMWD was
required to maintain ' n s in that area. He stated when Hwy 74 was
reconfigured twenty j20) year go„ Gunnerson Avenue was raised, and conveying
pipesh ere placed un r the street to convey water from one side to the other. He
indic8i hat it was ,ether the City or Cal Tran requirement. Chairman Zanelli
stated the area geeYflooded every year and that they are privately owned. He
requestedyinformati to assists the owners of the properties. Chairman Zanelli
noted gas lineIhstallofion on Illinois just to the south of Riverside and requested a
status. Public Work§ Director /City Engineer Seumalo indicated that he does not
know of the details; however would discuss with staff.
Deputy City Attorney Winterswyk commented on the following:
• She provided information to the Commission on the San Diego Court ruling of Sprint
vs. San Diego County which had been requested by Commissioner Gonzales at the
February 17, 2009 Planning Commission Meeting.
Agenda Item No. 10
Agenda Item No. Pag 79 of 81
Paoa. 9 of 11
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS
Commissioner O'Neal commented on the following:
• No comments.
Commissioner Gonzales commented on the following:
• He requested clarification on the grading for the Toyota dealership. Public Works
Director /City Engineer Seumalo stated that the grading that iskcurrently taking place
is the completion of the deal between the property owner and Toyota.
Commissioner Mendoza commented on the follow!
• No comments.
Vice - Chairman Flores commented on the
• No comments.
Chairman Zanelli commented on
• He thanked staff for all of their hard
ADJOURNMENT
It was the consensus of the° Commission' adjourn to the March 17, 2009, Regular
Planning Commission meeting at 6:00 p located at 183 N. Main Street, Lake
Elsinore, CA 92530 y `\
Chairman Zallelll adlournea',the meefing at 7:11 p.m.
N
AXEL ZANELLI, CHAIRMAN
k� ' PLANNING COMMISSION
Respectfully
DANA PORCHE
OFFICE SPECIALIST III
Agenda Item No. 10
Agenda Item No. Pag 80 of 81
paoa 1 of 11
ATTEST:
TOM WEINER
ACTING DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Agenda Item No. 10
Agenda Item No. Pag 81 of 81
Pnar 11 of 11