HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Item No. 16 (1 of 6)REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR
AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ROBERT A. BRADY
CITY MANAGER
DATE: DECEMBER 13, 2011
SUBJECT: 2011 COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
GENERAL PLAN AND RELATED DOCUMENTS
Background
The City of Lake Elsinore Planning Commission approved (4 -1 vote) Resolution No.
2011 -36 at their regular meeting on November 15, 2011, recommending that the City
Council certify the Recirculated Program Environmental Impact Report (RP -EIR),
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program, with the deletion of Section 2.2 ( "Effects of Climate
Change ") of the Climate Action Plan. Commissioner Blake cast the dissenting vote
based upon the deletion of Section 2.2 of the Climate Action Plan as stated in the
motion. He expressed no other concerns or objections.
The Planning Commission unanimously approved (5 -0 vote) Resolution 2011 -37
recommending that the City Council adopt the General Plan Update, Downtown Master
Plan, Key to Downtown Implementation Plan, Downtown Code and Housing Element
Update.
All of the Draft General Plan Update documents and the Recirculated Draft Program
Environmental Impact Report (RDP -EIR) documents have been posted on the City's
website and available at City Hall since September, 2011 and continue to be available
for public review. Additionally, hardcopies of the RDP -EIR are available at local libraries.
Testimony
The Commission took testimony from three representatives from the development
community. Attorney John Messina, Jr., representing Brian Lam of Mebo Property
Development LLC, requested that the Commission postpone their decision to approve
the Downtown Master Plan until his client had an opportunity to present his plans to
bring a "world class project worth millions of dollars," to the downtown area.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 16
Page 1 of 4
Comprehensive Update to the City General Plan
December 13, 2011
Page 2 of 4
Commissioners O'Neal, Gonzales and Morsch referenced the City Manager's response
letter dated November 10, 2011, stating that all of the uses requested by Mr. Lam could
be allowed except for the residential condominiums. Commissioner Gonzales stated
that the Commission could still consider an amendment to the Master Plan in the future
for condominiums. Commissioner O'Neal stated that while he appreciated the request,
the decision to stop the General Plan Update process would have to rest with the City
Council. (Correspondence related to Mebo Property Development LLC are attached to
this Staff Report as Exhibit `A.')
David Garrison, representing Marinita Development, requested that the property at Lake
and Mountain be removed from the Lake View District and added to the Alberhill District
in the General Plan. Commissioner Blake questioned whether the change would
improve or otherwise affect the entitlements on the property. Staff confirmed that it
would not. Commissioners O'Neal and Morsch had no issues with the request.
(Correspondence related to Marinita Development are attached to this Staff Report as
Exhibit `B.')
Lastly, Steve Semingson of Civic Partners testified that Staff had presented a "pretty
sophisticated process." He thanked all participants for a job well done.
Discussion
Commissioner Morsch stated that he could not support the State's justification for
instituting the greenhouse gas emissions laws, and did not want to perpetuate a
philosophy claiming their effects on climate change. In response to Commissioner
Blake's query as to the consequences of omitting Chapter 2.2 of the proposed Climate
Action Plan (CAP), Shauna Callery of Rincon Consultants who prepared the City's CAP,
replied generally that Chapter 2 was required to explain existing conditions and disclose
the findings to the public. City Attorney Leibold offered the Commission a middle ground
option, suggesting that the City not endorse the science, but rather modify the language
in Chapter 2.2 to clearly state that it forms the basis of the State's Legislative mandate.
Chairperson Jordan requested that Staff complete the minor revisions to the documents
that she had discussed with Staff earlier that day. The changes would make exhibits
clearer and more helpful to developers, and have been itemized in an Errata Sheet for
the Downtown Master Plan and Code, as Exhibit `I' attached to this Staff Report..
Commissioner O'Neal thanked Castle & Cooke for their letter of support dated
November 11, 2011, and thanked their representatives and Mr. Semingson of Civic
Partners for their attendance. (Correspondence from Castle & Cooke is attached to this
Staff Report as Exhibit 'C.')
Page 2 of 4
Comprehensive Update to the City General Plan
December 13, 2011
Page 3 of 4
Analysis
On the day of the Commission hearing, Staff received correspondence from K. S. Chen,
which was provided to the Planning Commissioners at the hearing. Staff presented the
results of their research into Mr. Chen's request, stating that no assessor parcel
numbers were provided, but evidence showed that the General Plan did not alter the
existing land use designations on his property. The Commission had no further
discussion on the matter. (Correspondence from K. S. Chen is attached to this Staff
Report as Exhibit 'D.')
The day after the Planning Commission hearing, Rod Oshita of Fairway Partners
emailed Staff a copy of a Federal Emergency Management Agency Letter of Map
Revision (LOMR), completing his request to remove the General Plan's Floodway
designation from nearly all of his property between Chaney and Third Street west of the
flood channel. (Portions of the LOMR referring to Mr. Oshita's property are attached to
this Staff Report as Exhibit 'E.') The request has been added to the Errata Changes to
the 2011 Draft General Plan Update (See Exhibit `H'). Additionally, the Errata Sheet
notes the following: "In the event that land use delineations are changed and property
is released from the floodway, the land use map will assume the designation of the
balance of the parcel or next adjacent property, subject to Federal requirements and
constraints ". Further, the Errata Sheet notes that all changes to the text of the RP -EIR,
where the General Plan text is referenced, shall also be made to the General Plan text.
On November 21, 2011, Staff received email correspondence from the Soboba Band of
Luiseno Indians which is attached to this Staff Report as Exhibit 'F.' It provides the
same comments that the Tribe submitted regarding the RP -EIR. The Responses to
their comments have been included in the Final EIR portion of your packet.
Fiscal Impact
The Comprehensive General Plan is a long -term planning document. There is no direct
fiscal impact to the City.
Page 3 of 4
Comprehensive Update to the City General Plan
December 13, 2011
Page 4 of 4
Recommendation
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council take the following actions:
1. Approve Resolution No. 2011 -070 certifying the Recirculated Program
Environmental Impact Report, Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding
Considerations, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
2. Approve Resolution No. 2011 -071 adopting the 2011 Comprehensive Update
to the General Plan.
3. Approve Resolution No. 2011 -072 adopting the Housing Element Update for
the period July 1, 2008 to June 30, 2014.
4. Introduce for first reading by title only Ordinance No. 2011 -1295 adopting the
Downtown Master Plan, Key to Downtown Implementation Plan, and
Downtown Code.
Prepared by: Warren Morelion, AIC�
Planning Manager
Approved by: Robert A. Brady
City Manager
Attachments:
1. Exhibit 'A' — City Manager's letter to Brian Lam, dated November 10, 2011; Mebo Property
Development LLC letter, dated October 18, 2011, with attachments.
2. Exhibit'B' — Staff analysis for Discussion with the Planning Commission, dated November 15,
2011; Marinita Development Company letter dated November 8, 2011, with attachments.
3. Exhibit 'C' — Castle & Cooke letter dated November 11, 2011.
4. Exhibit 'D' — K. S. Chen letter dated November 15, 2011.
5. Exhibit 'E' — LOMR from FEMA regarding Rod Oshita property.
6. Exhibit 'F' — Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians dated November 21, 2011.
KI
8. Exhibit'H' - Errata Changes to the 2011 General Plan Update, December 13, 2011.
9. Exhibit 'I' — Errata Changes to the Downtown Master Plan and Downtown Code.
10. Staff Report to the Planning Commission, November 15, 2011
11. Minutes of the Planning Commission hearing of November 15, 2011 are not available at this
time. However, tape of the public hearing is located and available for review on the City's
website, www.lake- elsinore.org, "Agendas & Minutes," "Planning Commission Video," "2011
Planning Commission Meetings," "November 15, 2011 Video" (audio only).
12. Resolution No. 2011 -070 certifying the Recirculated Program Environmental Impact Report
for the General Plan Update, Housing Element Update, Downtown Master Plan, Key to
downtown Implementation Plan, Downtown Code, and Annexation No. 81.
13. Resolution No. 2011 -071 adopting the Comprehensive Update to the General Plan.
14. Resolution No. 2011 -072 adopting the Housing Element Update for the period July 1, 2008 to
June 20, 2014.
15. Ordinance No. 2011 -1295 adopting the Downtown Master Plan, Key to Downtown
Implementation and Downtown Code.
16. Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations regarding the
Recirculated Program Environmental Impact Report for the City of Lake Elsinore General
Plan Update.
17. Final Recirculated Program Environmental Impact Report.
Page 4 of 4
CITY OF
LAKE Cog LSMOR E
E1CTREME
November 10, 2011
Mr. Brian Lam
P.O. Box 630
Rosemead, CA 91770 -0630
Re: 116 East Lakeshore Drive Property (APN's:374- 282 -001 through -
004, 374 - 281 -001 through -010, and 373 - 162 -001 through -005)
Dear Mr. Lam:
Thank you for your interest in developing your property along Lakeshore
Drive. The purpose of this letter is to reply to your inquiry concerning
BRIAN TISDALE future zoning of your property and your ability to develop the site with a
MAYOR mixed -use development consisting of a five -story hotel /casino, shopping
strip, walking pier /marina, restaurants, business /service center, children
play garden, and residential condominiums.
ROBERT E. MAGEE
MAYOR PRO TEM I have reviewed the location of your property and determined that the
current zoning is SP (Specific Plan) and the general plan land use
designation is Future Specific Plan — L (Marina Village). This means that
DARYL HICKMAN if you were to develop your property today, creation of a specific plan by
COUNCILMEMBER you would be necessary prior to development, which could allow you a
mix of uses on the site. However, as you know, the City is currently in the
process of a General Plan Update that is expected to be completed by the
MELISSA A. MELENDEZ end of the year. As part of the update, the .City is adopting a Downtown
COUNCILMEMBER Master Plan and Code to regulate the downtown area between the 1 -15
Freeway and the Lake. Your property is located in the Waterfront District
of the Downtown Master Plan and has a Downtown Recreational land use
PETER G. WEBER designation.
COUNCILMEMBER
Section 1.4 (Detailed Land Use Matrix) of the Downtown Code lists those
uses which are permitted within the Downtown Recreational area. Based
ROBERT A. BRADY on review of the matrix, I believe that all of the uses you outlined in your
CITY MANAGER letter could be allowed except for residential condominiums. The
Downtown Recreational designation is established to create a special
lakeside recreational environment that is an extension of the historic
951.674.3124 downtown. The idea is to develop the area near the lake as a recreational
130S. MAIN STREET destination for visitors to enjoy, a tourist attraction rather than a living
LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530 environment. As a result, permitted uses in the Downtown Recreational
W W W. LA KE- E LS I NO RE.O RG
e0i i El j� `��
Mr. Brian Lam
November 10, 2011
Page 2
area are limited to such uses as parks and open space, passive and
active recreation, nature /interpretive centers, open air markets, hotels,
restaurants, and water - oriented recreational commercial uses. Keep in
mind that the City would need to understand the kind of commercial and
business /service uses you are requesting before making a final approval
determination.
Essentially, the Downtown Master Plan has done much of the design work
and environmental review for most elements of your proposal. Anyone
who submitted a land use request consistent with the Downtown Master
Plan would be allowed to develop using its Implementation Plan and
Zoning Standards. However, special uses not specifically listed in the
Land Use Matrix may require additional review, such as your proposed
casino.
If you should have any questions regarding this matter, or if I can be of
further assistance, please contact me at (951) 674 -3124 ext 204.
Sincerely,
Robert A. Brady
City Manager
7o:
12e.
e o toperty (Development. C,LC.
Future 2-axx.WW -venue For City of Lake Efsinore
Wr. Wp6ertA. Brady
City Wanager
r
i,
Future Deveropment @116 E. Lakeshore (DR
City of Lake Elsinore, California
From: Brian Lam, Project (Director of
We6o TYoperty Devefopment, LLB:
(Dear Mr. Brady, City Manager
A few months ago, I wroteyou a letter of intendforfuture development for those vacant land parcefs between
Wain. street andSpring street on Lakeshore Or (There -APN #373 - 162 -001 to 005, and #374 - 282 -001 to
004, and #374 - 281 -001 to 010. 7heirexisting zoning is commerciaf-residentiarmix use zone. For the future
development purpose, please maintain this zone as mix use zone and please exclude any major down zoning to
these parce&. Any changing e4sting Wix, use zone to whatsoeverzone wid 6e not in the best interest of the
City and the changed may cause or create more and more difficulty and costly for all of us.
As we expressed to you and the City Counsel mem6ers after we bought these vacant lands last years. The City
members know what are our interest andpurpose towardvacant lands. `You, WayorandCity councifinem6ers
express a positive attitude, welcome andsupporting our future development project. With the existing mix use
zoning in mind, we start conducting vary predevelopment studies and analysis since and continuing, we wish
to create the highest and the best use of these lands, and this new future development will create about 100 or
more jobs for the local workforce, attract more visitors each year come and spend more at the focal business, City
will collect more business tax user taxi property tax; and many more taxes each year
As you can see on ourWndering design, the project contains a 5 stories hotel /casino, shopping strip, walking
pier /marina, restaurants, business /service center, children play garden, residentialcondos etc... the cost of this
development estimateda6out $50,000,000+ doffars. What tax; revenue wiffCity colrect in future from this?
Wy project designer warning me that the City going to change the existing commerdaf- residential mix use
zoning to a B'udfic Barkordown zoning to a single residentialzone ? 9his is a very panic news if it is true and
this change won't bring the best benefits to City, local business /residents, and it wilfcreate more difficufty to
us, a developergroup whom trying to bring in more jobs and more 6enefits to the City of Elsinore.
We are reviewing a few architect proposals and ready to finalize one soon, and hopefuffy submit a prelim
development package to the City for review /plan check before the end of (December `2011.
Sincerefy,
'— )x(
rian Lam,
626- 831 -0661
116E. Lakeshore or. #11. City of Lah<g E(sinore, Ca. 92530 or mailing address: (P.O. (&x630, (Rgsemead, Ca. 91770 -0630
-.O�
wOYIlvw6 @ZOMGA :lIVW3 I
ZbB9-BSC9Z9 :XV.i SZ48- BSE-9Z9 n31 9
VSn 0 Lo L6 VINHOMWO'AHneavue 1HO93U 9OV-n[A 093W W
'MUG 3An01NnOW 96l F
F
� I i
�1 �� SS3tlOOV /311ll1�3fOtld � '� p L�
��O/�
V/
W
cc
LL
W
f
MVId 311S
amA
u4
d
a
g li
II
�
U
S
amA
u4
d
a
A#""
�
.,,.. �•� »» �
Marinita Development Company letter dated November 8, 2011
Staff Analysis for Discussion with the Planning Commission
November 15, 2011
The following requests are excerpted from Marinita's letter, with Staff's analysis
in Bold:
Add our proposed commercial project at Lake Street and Mountain
Street to the Alberhill District in lieu of the Lake View District.
See Responses to Items No. 6 and No. 7 below.
2. The current language within the EIR evaluation of General Plan Goals
and Policies as stated in the Lake View District ... are detrimental to
our proposed project, as shown on Page 3.1 -33, (Table 3.1 -6, District
Plan Land Use Impacts). These impacts are at odds with the General
Plan Goals and Policies.
Staff does not concur that the language used to describe the
affect that the Lake View District Plan will have upon existing land
uses, is either detrimental to any specific development proposal
or at odds with the General Plan Goals and Policies Summary
listed in the same table. Development of commercial uses is
encouraged; rehabilitation of existing commercial is emphasized
in order for these centers to remain.
3. We offer the following addition to the language, "These uses will
provide the necessary needed residential land uses for the City's
growing population and needed local services. New commercial
services would provide proximate shopping to local residential land use
areas eliminating long automobile trips from residential areas to
commercial service areas that exist today."
Staff finds this language acceptable as an addition to the impact
discussion for the Lake View District Plan. While it is not
necessary, nor is this type of language used elsewhere in the
Table, it can be included to provide specific detail.
4. General Plan Update Policies Nos. 1.2 and 1.3 discourage strip
centers, drive -thru and fast food services. This is not consistent for or
with the type of neighborhood commercial development envisioned by
the developer as evidenced by the City's prior land use approvals,
given the Planning Commission and City Council endorsement for the
Lake Street Marketplace on the NWC of Lake and Mountain. Our
commercial project envisions a drive thru coffee and possible fast/
convenient food operator(s) including the type of neighborhood
Marinita Response — Page 2
services normally developed in a planned, pocket commercial
development.
This comment takes a portion of the policies noted out of context,
and thus alters their intent.
Policy 1.2 states: "Encourage development of unified or
clustered community -level and neighborhood -level commercial
centers and discourage development of strip commercial uses."
In its full context, the GP envisions well - planned, integrated
development design, such as the proposed Lake Street
Marketplace.
Policy 1.3 states: "Encourage the development of sit -down
restaurant establishments were appropriate and discourage the
proliferation of drive - through fast food establishments."
In its full context, the GP envisions a balance of food services,
those that offer unique and family- oriented dining experiences as
well as necessary drive - through fast food businesses that meet
the needs of busy residents.
5. We recommend the following language be added to the policies:
"Discourage strip centers unless associated with or near to a planned
development or specific plan area." "Discourage drive -thru and fast
food in strip centers but permit drive thru and fast food centers in
planned commercial projects or centers where multiple commercial
and service land uses are located."
Staff believes that the recommended language is too confining
and constricts the intent of the policies in their full context. The
policies do not discuss the permitting process, but rather
encourages or discourages the design and balance of land uses.
6. There are ten (10) commercial parcels located across Lake Street from
the very successful Alberhill Ranch project, and these commercial
parcels more closely identify and relate to the Alberhill Ranch due to
proximity, traffic and topography. We feel that the Goals and Policies of
the Alberhill District are more in tune with new construction of the
Alberhill Ranch and not with the existing commercial Goals and
Policies of the Lake View District.
Staff could not find any Goals or Policies in the Lake View District
that are not in tune with Marinita's proposed development at Lake
and Mountain.
Marinita Response — Page 3
As with other Districts where appropriate, Goals and Policies
include connections to new development, strong links between
existing and future residential communities and supporting
commercial, entertainment or recreational uses (Lake View Goal
1, Page LV -6).
7. Our suggested request to change to the Alberhill District does not
require significant effort on the City's part in either document, other
than a few changes on the Land Use Maps.
The District Maps and land use data form the basis for the
spreadsheets developed for each land use by acreage,
commercial square footage, industrial square footage, employee
counts, dwelling unit counts, number of households, and build -
out population counts. The spreadsheets were distributed to
consultants who formulated and completed the Climate Action
Plan, Traffic Impact Analysis, and Housing Element. This
methodology used by Planning, Engineering and GIS Staff
assured that the data was uniform and consistent for all
documents related to the General Plan Update.
Staff does not believe it is necessary to incur the delay or
expense anticipated to honor Marinita's request. If Mr. Fawcett
remains uncomfortable with the positioning of his proposed
project, Staff recommends that he submit a General Plan
Amendment subsequent to the approval of the General Plan
Update, at his cost.
maminita
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
November 8, 2011
Mr. Warren Morelian
Planning Department Manager
City of Lake Elsinore
130 South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
Re: General Plan and EIR comments on APN 389- 03 -11 -18 and 28 and 29
NWC Lake Street and Mountain Street, Marinita Development
Dear Mr. Morelian:
On behalf of Marinita Development Company, I want to thank the City of Lake Elsinore for the
opportunity to comment on the 2011 General Plan Update. I also want to thank the staff for the
exceptionally good job they have conducted in correcting and modifying past deficient areas of
the General Plan and Climate Action Plan with the positive corrections noted in the current
drafts. The former drafts posed significant problems for us and others in the land owner and
development community. We wish to endorse the current drafts for Planning Commission and
City Council approval subject to the following comments and request for minor changes to the
EIR and General Plan. We thank the City Council for taking the additional time with staff to
perfect the current General Plan and associated drafts.
Draft EIR
We ask the Planning Commission and City Council to add our proposed commercial project at
Lake Street and Mountain Street to the Alberhill District, in lieu of the Lake View District as it
is currently shown on all General Plan land use maps. We have specific comments on the
current language within the EIR evaluation of General Plan Goals and Policies as stated in the
Lake View District that are detrimental to our proposed project as as shown on page. 3.1- 33.
The EIR impact statement is: "Existing vacant land would be converted to residential and
commercial uses or preserved as open space. Existing residential and commercial areas would
remain with emphasis placed on redevelopment and rehabilitation structures. " These impacts
are at odds with the General Plan Goals and Policies which states "Also policies include
promotion of a neighborhood commercial district on existing vacant lands within the District. "
We offer the following suggestion for the EIR impact statement, in lieu of the current statement
quoted above: "Existing vacant land would be converted to residential and commercial uses or
preserved as open space. The vacant converted land to residential and commercial land uses will
provide the necessary needed residential land uses for the Lake Elsinore growing population and
,�$5 BIRCH STREET •NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660 • (949) 756 8677 • FAX (949) 756 -8436
Q /,{}/ (.�
needed local services provided to the existing and proposed land uses. New commercial services
would provide the needed proximate shopping to local residential land use areas mitigating long
automobile trips from residential areas to commercial service areas, that exist today. "
General Plan Update
Page 2 -19 Goal 1 -1.2 notes the following: "Discourages strip centers ". And 1.3 "discourages
Drive thru and fast food ". These General Plan goals are not consistent for or with the type of
neighborhood commercial development envisioned by the developer as evidenced by the Cities
prior land use approvals given the Planning Commission and City Council endorsement for the
Lake Street Marketplace on NWC of Lake and Mountain. Our commercial project envisions a
drive thru coffee and possible fast / convenient food operator(s) including the type of
neighborhood services normally developed in a planned, pocket Commercial development and
has been previously approved by the City.
We recommend that the General Plan policy be rewritten as follows: "Discourages strip centers
unless associated with or near to a planned development or specific plan area. " And 1.3
"discourages Drive thru and fast food in strip centers but permit drive thru and fast food
centers in planned commercial projects or centers where multiple commercial and service
land uses are located ".
Without the above noted changes, our previously approved project could be considered
inconsistent with the proposed General Plan and invite further unnecessary land use and CEQA
litigation
There are ten (10) commercial parcels associated with our project, located across Lake Street
from the very successful Alberhill Ranch project and these commercial parcels more closely
identify and relate to the Alberhill Ranch due to proximity, traffic, and topography. We feel that
the Goals and Policies of Alberhill District are more in tune with new construction of the
Alberhill Ranch and not with the existing commercial Goals and Policies of the Lake View
district. All of the existing commercially developed projects in the Lake view District are some 2
miles plus away from the Lake and Mountain commercial location.
As developers of Commercial land during these troubled recessionary times our community
needs to look to position our communities needed commercial projects to be as successful as
possible. We request the City to view the Alberhill District as the newest master planned
community for The City of Lake Elsinore to which we are identified with directly across from
Lake Street. Our future commercial project is going to be required by the City to coordinate all
of our street improvements on Lake Street with the Alberhill Ranch project because of the
massive amount of costs sharing in relocation of all underground and above ground utilities and
Lake Street roadway improvements. Marinita Development Company will also be coordinating
our construction design and materials to identify directly with the Alberhill Ranch Specific Plan
development standards.
Please be aware, that when the first General Plan Land Use Maps were developed, several years
ago, our commercial project was included in the Alberhill District. For an unknown reason, the
latest General Plan documents depict our project in the Lake View District. Our suggested
D; I �� _
• 0
change to stay within the Alberhill District, as formally proposed, does not require significant
effort on the City's part in either document, other than a few changes on the Land Use Maps. For
these reasons noted above, we respectfully request that the properties indentified as APN 389 -03
-11 thru 18 and 28 and 29 be included in the Alberhill District, not the Lake View District and
the respective Land Use Maps reflect this request in the final EIR and GPU documents. We also
suggest the EIR and General Plan policy comments noted above be modified.
Respectfully submitted,
Lake Street Marketplace, LLC
J. Scott Fawcett
Managing Member
CC: Planning Commission
City Council
Attachments: Assessor Parcel Maps and Commercial Site Plan
EA
p O
i
%
O
c at
b
M 4.4
.s '0 j V rz
toy NJO7
3t07 Icy 0107 .
J
• �h
R
P f�
O
V 1
bo
i
�o +
Z•d
0 UeC
LSOT- Sf,Zt6061 v e / y9 rEC•TO SO 9 _ - --
- _ ,/_ 11
o
Q
t o •'33 P p
p
0
R
P
r X07 _ --OGNV
e
:a
b �
M
r .
Z!'
LSOT- Sf,Zt6061 v e / y9 rEC•TO SO 9 _ - --
- _ ,/_ 11
W
TN O O� ° o N 2 NN
O. O 7 C� N N N N
V— ,V —.. m CD 5 Om n N
n Y h -,o Y 00 m 00
nM
vi
+I o
U '00 N o m
a ,, m °_' O7
x
S
O v ° nv ne O o &i �0
d U
+I a SO O N m,n c
C
m m oe a o°e ne eD II 'a a
Boa warn aU@)CdJoo °E
E vvv m -; �'e o c O °n c vv
W LL
NN�o
P '0
� D•
h N
+I
,n o
vn
M C°e
+1 eA
m
d tm Q
N c
O v='o-o 0
C•- C >
--I J
3 W
nNO,n PO EF G _C=
M .- v V
�.o eV.- g 4@t UA
+1 8
IL ad
vii c ° Q crn�
v
C3 vv m a S8 s9 l8tie e
o2� � ,1 m,.,. o c e t°�° o cO s o.n c a -o-L A
Vi
-2.962&2 d Y� K........ ,� �� � JmJU 0- COL � JmJU OLd
�{ vi I I I
R 1 k
K K ,iii I
I
- I II
all i °ll° I '
- - -- -------- - - - - -- --
I
to d€ d ! i I I
loll
it 11 rs 00&0
I
i
° e
t SdOHS
I � f
I
f s w \\ o n R
- - - - - -~ — \ - - r
l �°
I fl ®
dewt
-- - -- - -- — ---- +-- --� — - --�--
I
�W � I J.11WV� a-lennls) la
J
z
Q
�Q
�v
�U
OD
N
a
I
z
g
W
f-'
N
z
W
ce
CL
N
e'r 0
7/O u�N $
uj
W
W
OC
W cn
UW
gg
W aZ
�Luo
N Q
Z
W W
Q
ce ZO'
cn O v;
W IW
Y uY
g
zg
�� gal►
� � -�� �
{M
�
,;�
, to
614
.. , .:�
l �°
I fl ®
dewt
-- - -- - -- — ---- +-- --� — - --�--
I
�W � I J.11WV� a-lennls) la
J
z
Q
�Q
�v
�U
OD
N
a
I
z
g
W
f-'
N
z
W
ce
CL
N
e'r 0
7/O u�N $
uj
W
W
OC
W cn
UW
gg
W aZ
�Luo
N Q
Z
W W
Q
ce ZO'
cn O v;
W IW
Y uY
g
zg
November 11, 2011
USE OME oD
Mr. Warren Morelion
Planning Department Manager NOV 1 4 2011
City of Lake Elsinore
130 South Main Street CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 PLANNING DIVISION
Re: General Plan and EIR comments — Castle & Cooke Properties, Alberhill District
Dear Mr. Morelion:
On behalf of Castle & Cooke, I am endorsing for your approval the recently published General
Plan and EIR drafts, including the Climate Action Plan (CAP). Over the past 6 months we
appreciate the efforts of staff to take into consideration our company's comments and land
use /circulation concerns. Almost all of our observations and comments on the General Plan and
Climate Action Plan have been addressed. We have not always agreed with staff and staff has not
always agreed with us, but the net result in my opinion is a professional, accurate, balanced and
defensible General Plan and associated documents.
While we professionally question the veracity of "climate warming or climate change" that
advocates claim of these "measurable" climate changes caused by man's activities, we
understand that this CAP program is required by State law to be implemented at the City level.
We are encouraged and pleased with the changes to the former drafts that are currently embodied
in the documents currently before the decision - makers. Our only comment to you is to eliminate
Chapter 2, "Climate Change Science and Policy" of the CAP document since it appears to us to
be a biased, partial analysis of the putative science behind the political issue of climate warming
or change. I do not believe this statement is required by law and it should not be endorsed in your
public document giving recognition as a recitation of science facts.
Finally, we have identified some small changes we feel necessary in the circulation classifications
in the Alberhill District but we believe we are resolving these matters with your planning and
engineering staff.
Overall, the General Plan and Climate Action Plans are acceptable to Castle & Cooke for the
Alberhill District where our approximate 2,500 acres are located. We again thank the current
staff for the very professional and accomplished approach they have taken to bring the General
Plan process to finality.
!Se rely, Ir
M. "Tom" Tomlinson
r V ice President, Castle & Cooke
Alberhill Ranch
CC: Bob Brady, City Manager
Planning Commission
City Council
Castle & Cooke Alberhill Ranch, LLC
Castle & Cooke Alberhill Home Building, Inc.
�� Castle & Cooke Alberhill Realty, Inc.
EXHIBIT, `-�` 4113 Pearl Street • Lake Elsinore, California 92530 • (951) 245 -0476 • Fax (951) 245 -7801
www.AlberhiltRanch.com
I am the owner of property of 4 properties in Lake Elsinore specifically on Collier
Ao-'` Avenue across from the Outlet Center, on Riverside Drive on Hwy 74, on Lakeshore
Drive and on Baker Street. I hereby request that the properties presently owned by
K.S.Chen Group in Lake Elsinore to remain the same land classification/zoning.
Dated: N
K. S
ber 15, 2011
and Investment Group
KANG -SHEN CHEN, DR. am
LOU KUN TAI FOUNDATION
6984 OVERLOOK TERRACE
ANAHEIM HILLS, CA 92807
TEL (714) 281 -1888
FAX (714) 281.6881
CELL (714)398.5968
KSCHEN@CKSWESTERNINC.COM
EXHIBIT......,_.'', ." v f z
RECEIVED
NOV 1'6 2011
CITY CLERKS OFFICE
4
J � 4
rE
0
o
4:::Z
°
�K
H
W
m
+
a
•
^�
tV
4
J � 4
oti4Ai �E.►.
y. r
a. o
ND S��'J4`
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Washington, D.C. 20472
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
The Honorable Robert Magee
Mayor, City of Lake Elsinore
Administrative Office, City Hall
130 South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
Dear Mayor Magee:
MAY 112006
IN REPLY REFER TO:
Case No.: 06- 09 -BO90P
Community Name: City of Lake Elsinore, CA
Community No.: 060636
Effective Date of � � � � � 2a06
This Revision:
The Flood Insurance Study report and Flood Insurance Rate Map for your community have been revised by this
Letter of Map Revision (LOMR). Please use the enclosed annotated map panel(s) revised by this LOMR for
floodplain management purposes and for all flood insurance policies and renewals issued in your community.
Additional documents are enclosed which provide information regarding this LOMB. Please see the List of
Enclosures below to determine which documents are included. Other attachments specific to this request may be
included as referenced in the Determination Document. If you have any questions regarding floodplain management
regulations for your community or the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) in general, please contact the
Consultation Coordination Officer for your community. If you have any technical questions regarding this LOMR,
please contact the Director, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Division of the Department of Homeland Security's
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in Oakland, California, at (510) 627 -7175, or the FEMA Map
Assistance Center toll free at 1- 877 - 336 -2627 (1- 877 -FEMA MAP). Additional information about the NFIP is
available on our website at http: / /www.fema.gov /nfip.
Sincerely,
Michael B. Godesky, Project Engineer
Engineering Management Section
Mitigation Division
List of Enclosures:
Letter of Map Revision Determination Document
Annotated Flood Insurance Rate Map
Annotated Flood Insurance Study Report
cc: Mr. Ken Seumalo, P.E.
City Engineer
City of Lake Elsinore
Mr. Rod Oshita
Fairway Commercial Partners
Mr. A. Jake Gusman, P.E.
Senior Hydraulic Engineer
WEST Consultants, Inc.
For: William R. Blanton Jr., CFM, Acting Chief
Engineering Management Section
Mitigation Division
na s
t ` ._w� ,
Page 1 of 5
g
Issue Date: MAY 11 1806
Effective Date: Case No.: 06- 09 -BO90P
SEP 212�g06
LOMB -APP
Q�PA�T
Federal Emergency Management Agency
o3��gND
Washington, D.C. 20472
SEG
LETTER OF MAP REVISION
DETERMINATION DOCUMENT
COMMUNITY AND REVISION INFORMATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
BASIS OF REQUEST
City of Lake Elsinore
CHANNEL RELOCATION
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
Riverside County
CHANNELIZATION
FLOODWAY
California
NEW TOPOGRAPHIC DATA
COMMUNITY
COMMUNITY NO.: 060636
IDENTIFIER
Temescal Wash / Lake Elsinore Outlet Channel and Third
APPROXIMATE LATITUDE & LONGITUDE: 33.670, - 117.330
Street Drain
SOURCE: Other DATUM: NAD 83
ANNOTATED MAPPING ENCLOSURES
ANNOTATED STUDY ENCLOSURES
TYPE: FIRM` NO.: 060636 2053 F DATE: August 18, 2003
DATE OF EFFECTIVE FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY: August 18, 2003
TYPE: FIRM NO.: 060636 2054 F DATE: August 18, 2003
FLOOD PROFILES: 08P, 09P
TYPE: FIRM NO.: 060636 2061 F DATE: August 18, 2003
FLOODWAY DATA TABLE: 4
TYPE: FIRM NO.: 060636 2062 F DATE: August 18, 2003
Enclosures reflect changes to flooding sources affected by this revision.
` FIRM - Flood Insurance Rate Map; " FBFM - Flood Boundary and Floodway Map; "' FHBM - Flood Hazard Boundary Map
FLOODING SOURCE(S) & REVISED REACH(ES) See Page 2 for Additional Flooding Sources
Temescal Wash — from just downstream of Chaney Street to approximately 1,100 feet downstream of Riverside Drive
SUMMARY OF REVISIONS
Flooding Source Effective Flooding Revised Flooding increases Decreases
Temescal Wash Zone AE Zone AE YES YES
Floodway Floodway YES YES
BFEs* BFEs YES YES
Zone X (shaded) Zone X (shaded) YES YES
BFEs - Base Flood Elevations
DETERMINATION
This document provides the determination from the Department of Homeland Security's Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
regarding a request for a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) for the area described above. Using the information submitted, we have determined that
a revision to the flood hazards depicted in the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) report and/or National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) map is
warranted. This document revises the effective NFIP map, as indicated in the attached documentation. Please use the enclosed annotated map
panels revised by this LOMR for floodplain management purposes and for all flood insurance policies and renewals in your community.
This determination is based on the flood data presently available. The enclosed documents provide additional information regarding this determination. If you have
any questions about this document, please contact the FEMA Map Assistance Center toll free at 1- 877 -336 -2627 (1- 877 -FEMA MAP) or by letter addressed to the
LOMR Depot, 3601 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22304. Additional Information about the NFIP is available on our website at http: / /www.fema.govtnfip.
Michael B. Godesky, Project Engineer
Engineering Management Section
4 4
4 L "� iti .. ation Division 10697910.3.1.06098090 102 -1 -A -C
W
Z
N
W
Z
O
N
0t
O
d' J
W Q
(0) W
wa
w
h
cc
w
z
w
U}
�3
h�-
D
a
r.
LL.
a
CLJ
w
IZ
�
S
>,
C
a) •�
1fY
ca
m a
3
78
c CL
m
U
c°
J
w
��
�
�O
�O
N
CO e�
®
®
o
W
Z
N
W
Z
O
N
0t
O
d' J
W Q
(0) W
wa
w
h
cc
w
z
w
U}
�3
h�-
D
a
r.
LL.
a
CLJ
w
IZ
�
5
1fY
d G
0 LL
U
J
w
LL, LL
890Z 13NVd SNIOP
x
w
LL a
0a UJ
J � N
X
N
n
A
$ w 0 c
W G
o g FF
: w
wl, Q
s
8 Li
x
W
Z
N
W
a
w
Z
O
N
m
O
Ix
LL Z
00
W
L
W CO
_z
f�
0
O
LJL