Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Reso No 2014-30RESOLUTION NO. 2014-30 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA REGARDING A TRACTOR SUPPLY COMPANY RETAIL STORE LOCATED AT THE NORTHWESTERN CORNER OF COLLIER AVENUE (SR -74) AND ENTERPRISE WAY (APN 377 - 120 -002 & 038), ADOPTING FINDINGS OF CONSISTENCY WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP) FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014 -01 AND VARIANCE NO. 2014 -01; AND RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ADOPTION OF FINDINGS OF CONSISTENCY WITH THE MSHCP FOR COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2014 -01 WHEREAS, California Gold Development, has filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore requesting approval of Commercial Design Review No. 2014 -01, Conditional Use Permit No. 2014 -01 and Variance No. 2014 -01 ( "Project ") for the approval of a 18,800 square foot retail building with associated 15,000 square foot outdoor display area and associated improvements including two bio- retention basins, parking and landscaping located at the northwestern corner of Collier Avenue (SR -74) and Enterprise Way (the "project "); and WHEREAS, Section 6.0 of the MSHCP requires that all projects which are proposed on land covered by an MSHCP criteria cell and which require discretionary approval by the legislative body undergo the Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process ( "LEAP ") and a Joint Project Review ( "JPR ") between the City and the Regional Conservation Authority ( "RCA ") prior to public review of the project applications; and WHEREAS, Section 6.0 further requires that development projects not within an MSHCP criteria cell must be analyzed pursuant to the MSHCP "Plan Wide Requirements "; and WHEREAS, the Project is discretionary in nature and requires review and approval by the Planning Commission and /or City Council; and WHEREAS, the Project is not within an MSHCP Criteria Cell, Core or Linkage, but are within the Elsinore Plan Area of the MSHCP, and therefore, the Project was reviewed pursuant to the MSHCP "Plan Wide Requirements "; and WHEREAS, Section 6.0 of the MSHCP requires that the City adopt consistency findings prior to approving any discretionary project entitlements for development of property that is subject to the MSHCP; and WHEREAS, pursuant to LEMC Chapter 17.168 (Conditional Use Permits) and LEMC Chapter 17.172 (Variances). the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of reviewing and approving, conditionally approving, or denying conditional use permits and variances; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2014 -30 PAGE 2 of 5 WHEREAS, pursuant to LEMC Chapter 17.184 (Design Review) the Planning Commission has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council pertaining to Design Review of commercial projects; and WHEREAS, on August 19, 2014 at a duly noticed public hearing the Planning Commission has 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: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has reviewed and analyzed the proposed applications and their consistency with the MSHCP prior to making a decision to adopt findings that Conditional Use Permit No. 2014 -01 and Variance No. 2014 -01 are consistent with the MSHCP; and prior to making a decision to recommend that the City Council adopt Findings of Consistency with the MSHCP for Conditional Use Permit No. 2014 -01. SECTION 2. That in accordance with the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, and the MSHCP, Findings for adoption have been made as follows: 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 commercial design review, conditional use permit and variance request that require 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. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2014 -30 PAGE 3 of 5 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. 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. A number of suitable burrows were found on the project site during a reconnaissance -level survey conducted on the Project site. As required by the MSHCP, mitigation has been included requiring pre- construction focused species surveys within 30 -days prior to any ground - disturbing activities at the project site where suitable habitat is present and requiring appropriate mitigation if active nests are located. 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 UrbanNVildlands Interface Guidelines. The proposed project site is separated from nearby criteria cells other properties. 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. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2014 -30 PAGE 4 of 5 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 other properties. 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 developer will be required to pay the City's MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee. 10. The proposed project overall is consistent with the MSHCP. The Project is consistent with all applicable provisions of the MSHCP. No further actions related to the MSHCP are required. SECTION 3. Based upon the evidence presented, the above findings, and the attached conditions of approval, the Planning Commission hereby adopts findings that Conditional Use Permit No. 2014 -01 and Variance No. 2014 -01 are consistent with the MSHCP. SECTION 4. Based upon the evidence presented, .the above findings, and the attached conditions of approval, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore adopt findings that Commercial Design Review No. 2014 -01 is consistent with the MSHCP. SECTION 5. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of August 2014, by the following vote: Joh Gr , Chai man City ke Elsinore PI Wing Commission ATTEST: Richard J. MacHott, LEED Green Associate Planning Manager PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2014 -30 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 -30 as adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore at a regular meeting held on the 19th day of August 2014, and that the same was adopted by the following vote: AYES: CHAIRMAN GRAY, VICE CHAIRPERSON JORDAN, COMMISSIONER ARMIT, COMMISSIONER BLAKE, COMMISSIONER O'NEAL NOES: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE ABSENT: NONE Richard J. MaclHott, LEED Green Associate Planning Manager