The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPC Reso No 2014-15RESOLUTION NO. 2014 -15 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF FINDINGS OF CONSISTENCY WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP) FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36624 AND RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2013 -07, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF STATE HIGHWAY 74 AND ROSETTA CANYON DRIVE, IN THE RAMSGATE SPECIFIC PLAN WHEREAS, MBK Homes submitted applications for Tentative Tract Map No. 36624 and Residential Design Review No. 2013 -07 to subdivide 13 gross acres into 75 residential lots, private streets, parkways, and public utility lots; and to construct three (3) floor plans with three (3) architectural styles and a model home complex; on property located within the Ramsgate Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, these applications comprise the "project' as defined by Section 21065 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., which is defined as an activity which may cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment and which includes the issuance to a person of a lease, permit, license, certificate or other entitlement for use by one or more public agencies; and WHEREAS, Addendum No. 3 to the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 88090525) was prepared to evaluate environmental impacts resulting from the Ramsgate Specific Plan and Medium High Density Residential uses on the project site; and WHEREAS, public notice of said project has been given, and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item at public hearings held on January 21, 2014 February 4, 2014, and May 6, 2014; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has reviewed and analyzed the proposed applications and their consistency with the MSHCP prior to making a decision to recommend that the City Council adopt Findings of Consistency with the MSHCP. SECTION 2. That in accordance with the California Planning and Zoning Laws, the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, and the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan, Findings for adoption have been made as follows: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2014 -15 MSHCP CONSISTENCY FOR TTM 36624 & RDR 2013 -07 PAGE 2 of 5 1. The proposed project is a project under the City's MSHCP Resolution, and the City must make an MSHCP Consistency Finding before approval. The proposed project includes a tentative tract map and requires a number of discretionary approvals from the City, including CEQA review. Pursuant to the City's MSHCP Resolution, the project has been reviewed for MSHCP consistency, including consistency with "Other Plan Requirements." These include the Protection of Species Associated with Riparian /Riverine Areas and Vernal pool Guidelines (MSHCP, Section 6.1.2), Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines (MSHCP, Section 6.1.3), Additional Survey Needs and Procedures (MSHCP, Section 6.3.2), Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines (MSHCP, Section 6.1.4), Vegetation Mapping (MSHCP, Section 6.5. 1) requirements, Fuels Management Guidelines (MSHCP, Section 6.4), and payment of the MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee (MSHCP Ordinance, Section 4). 2. The proposed project is not subject to the City's LEAP (Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process) and the County's Joint Project Review processes. The proposed project is not located within an MSHCP Criteria Cell area, therefore, no formal LEAP submittal was required. However, the project is still required to demonstrate compliance with "Other Plan Requirements." The project is in compliance as described further below. 3. The proposed project is consistent with the Riparian /Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines. No vernal pools exist on the site and therefore vernal pool species are not expected to occur. Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP focuses on protection of riparian /riverine areas and vernal pool habitat types based on their value in the conservation of a number of MSHCP- covered species, none of which has any potential to occur on the project site. 4. The proposed project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines. The proposed project site is not located within the Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Area (NEPSSA) as shown on Figure 6 -1 of the MSHCP. Based on its location outside of any NEPSSA or Criteria Area Species Survey Area (CASSA), the proposed project is compliant with MSHCP Section 6.1.3. 5. The proposed project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2014 -15 MSHCP CONSISTENCY FOR TTM 36624 & RDR 2013 -07 PAGE 3 of 5 The MSHCP requires additional surveys for certain species if the project is located in CASSA, Amphibian Species Survey Area with Critical Area, Burrowing Owl Survey Areas with Criteria Area, and Mammal Species Survey Areas with Criteria Areas of the MSHCP. The project site is located outside of any CASSA for plants and mammals and no CASSA plant species were observed during the focused surveys for the site. The proposed project is located within the survey area identified for the burrowing owl. The site has already been rough graded and adjacent road improvements constructed. No suitable burrowing owl habitat currently exists on the project site. However, due to the migratory nature of the burrowing owl, there is a possibility that although burrowing owls are not currently located on the project site, they could occupy the site prior to actual project construction. Therefore, a pre- construction burrowing owl survey will be required per the MSHCP. Based upon the above, it can be concluded that the proposed project is consistent with the provisions of the MSHCP. 6. The proposed project is consistent with the UrbanANildlands Interface Guidelines. The proposed project site is separated from nearby criteria cells by existing residential subdivisions located within the Ramsgate Specific Plan. Therefore the urban/wildlands interface guidelines set forth in Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP are not applicable. 7. The proposed project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements. No vegetation mapping requirements apply to the proposed project. 8. The proposed project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines. The proposed project site is separated from nearby criteria cells by existing residential subdivisions located within the Ramsgate Specific Plan. Therefore, the fuels management guidelines set forth in the MSHCP are not applicable. 9. The proposed project is conditioned to pay the City's MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee. The applicant has satisfied the City's requirement to pay the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Local Development Mitigation Fee, as noted in the Eighth Operating Memorandum of Understanding to the Development Agreement between the City of Lake Elsinore and Rialto Development Corporation, recorded June 27, 1990. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2014 -15 MSHCP CONSISTENCY FOR TTM 36624 & RDR 2013 -07 PAGE 4 of 5 10. The proposed project overall is consistent with the MSHCP. The City received a letter dated February 27, 2006, from Thomas B. Mullen, Executive Director, Western Riverside Regional Conservation Authority stating that projects within the Ramsgate Specific Plan are covered by the mitigation program contained in that plan and accepted in anticipation of the MSHCP being adopted and the agency permits signed. Mr. Mullen concluded that the preservation of the mitigated lands for the Ramsgate SP helped to insure that the permits were signed. The entire project is consistent with the MSHCP and provides effective conservation on the project site to meet the biological issues and considerations of the MSHCP. 11.There is no substantial evidence, in the light of the whole record before the agency, that the project may have significant effects on the environment. SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, on the sixth day of May, 2014. D vid Blake, Cha' R #ran City of Lake Elsi re Planning Commission ATTEST: 7, Richard J. MfcHott, LEED Green Associate Planning Manager PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2014 -15 MSHCP CONSISTENCY FOR TTM 36624 & RDR 2013 -07 PAGE 5 of 5 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE SS I, Richard J. MacHott, Planning Manager of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, hereby certify that Resolution No. 2014 -15 was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore at a regular meeting held on the sixth day of May 2014, and that the same was adopted by the following vote: AYES: CHAIRMAN BLAKE, VICE CHAIRMAN GRAY, COMMISSIONER JORDAN, COMMISSIONER MORSCH, COMMISSIONER O'NEAL NOES: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE ABSENT: NONE Richard J. M cHott, LEED Green Associate Planning Manager