HomeMy WebLinkAbout0004_4_IDR 2015-02 - CC MSHCP Resolution 2.23.16RESOLUTION NO. 2016-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING FINDINGS THAT INDUSTRIAL DESIGN REVIEW
NO. 2015-02 IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY
MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN
WHEREAS, Kirk Moeller of MMA Architects filed an application with the City of
Lake Elsinore requesting approval of Industrial Design Review No. 2015-02 for the design
and construction three (3) industrial buildings located and related improvements on three
(3) proposed to be subdivided lots as follows: Building T: 24,026 SF building on a 1.47
AC lot, Building U: 20,089 SF building on a 1.02 AC lot, Building V: 29,885 SF building
on a 1.53 AC lot (the “Entitlement”) located on the north side of Chaney Street,
approximately 920 feet west of Minthorn Street, APN: 377-140-124 (the “Property”); and
WHEREAS, Section 6.0 of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat
Conservation Plan (MSHCP) requires that all discretionary projects within an MSHCP
criteria cell undergo the Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process (“LEAP”) and Joint Project
Review (“JPR”) to analyze the scope of the proposed development and establish a
building envelope that is consistent with the MSHCP criteria; and
W WHEREAS, the Applications are discretionary in nature and require review and
approval by the Planning Commission and/or City Council; and
WHEREAS, the Applications are 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 Entitlement for development of
property that is subject to the MSHCP; and
WHEREAS, on January 19, 2016, at a duly noticed public hearing the Planning
Commission considered evidence presented by the Community Development
Department and other interested parties with respect to this item; and adopted Planning
Commission Resolution No. 2016-08 recommending that the City Council adopt findings
that Industrial Design Review No. 2015-02 is consistent with the MSCHP; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 17.184.090 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code
(“LEMC”) the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore has the responsibility of making
decisions to approve, modify or disapprove recommendations of the Planning
Commission for commercial design review applications; and
WHEREAS, on February 23, 2016, at a duly noticed public meeting, the City
Council has considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission as well as
evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested
parties with respect to this item.
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2016-__
PAGE 2 OF 5
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council has considered the Project and its consistency with
the MSHCP.
SECTION 2. That in accordance with the MSHCP, the City Council makes the
following findings for MSHCP consistency:
1. The Project is a project under the City’s MSHCP Resolution, and the City
must make an MSHCP Consistency finding before approval.
The Property is not located within a MSHCP Criteria Cell. However, the
Property is within the Elsinore Plan Area and must be reviewed for
consistency with the MSHCP “Plan Wide Requirements,” including Section
6.1.2 Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines.
2. The Project is subject to the City’s LEAP and the County’s Joint Project
Review processes.
As stated above, the Property is not located within a MSHCP Criteria Cell and
therefore the Entitlement were not reviewed through the LEAP or Joint Project
Review processes.
3. The Project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools
Guidelines.
The proposed project would impact two water features: the Lake Elsinore
Outlet Channel located adjacent to the project site, and a 0.61-acre ponded
feature located within the project site at the end of Birch Street. According to
the Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation Report
(DBESP), the Lake Elsinore Outlet Channel meets the Multiple Species
Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) definition of a riparian/riverine resource,
because it contains freshwater flow during all or a portion of the year. The
other water feature does not meet this definition because it is artificially
created and does not have freshwater flow. Implementation of the proposed
project would directly impact 900 square feet (0.02 acre) of the Lake Elsinore
Outlet Channel at each of three proposed outfall structure locations during
construction. The total impact area would be 2,700 square feet (0.06 acre).
Should a fourth storm drain outfall structure be constructed, an additional
impact to 900 square feet (0.02 acre) of the Lake Elsinore Outlet Channel
would occur, thereby totaling 3,600 square feet (0.08 acre). As part of the
DBESP, the project would be required to implement mitigation, and best
management practices (BMPs) as part of a stormwater pollution prevention
plan (SWPPP) designed to prevent and avoid impacts to water quality within
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2016-__
PAGE 3 OF 5
the Lake Elsinore Outlet Channel during construction. Long-term impacts
would be minimized through project design features including bio-swales
which would treat potential water quality impacts. All potential impacts to
riparian/riverine habitat have been handled in accordance with the MSHCP.
In addition, no vernal pools exist on the project site; therefore, due to the lack
of suitable habitat, there is a very low potential for vernal pool species to
occur. The project is therefore consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas
and Vernal Pool Guidelines set forth in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP. No
further action regarding this section of the MSHCP is required.
4. The Project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant
Species Guidelines.
Per MSHCP requirements, the Property is not subject to the Narrow Endemic
Plant Species Guidelines set forth in Section 6.1.3. No further action
regarding this section of the MSHCP is required.
5. The Project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures.
Per MSHCP requirements, the Property is not subject to any of the Critical
Area Species Survey Area Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.3.2 of the
MSHCP, with the exception of Burrowing Owl. No burrowing owls or
burrowing owl signs were observed within the project site or adjacent lands.
The project site does not support any active burrows or suitable habitat due
to the heavy soil composition, ongoing mechanical disturbance of the site,
and the surrounding commercial urban setting. As required by the MSHCP,
mitigation has been included to conduct a Burrowing Owl survey 30 days prior
to any ground-disturbance, including removal vegetation or other debris. No
further action regarding this section of the MSHCP is required.
6. The Project is consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines.
The Property is surrounded by existing development or graded parcels
planned for development. Therefore, the Urban/Wildlands Interface
Guidelines set forth in Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP are not applicable. No
further action regarding this section of the MSHCP is required.
7. The Project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements.
The project biologist has mapped the riparian/riverine resources as part of
the DBESP, in accordance with the requirements of Vegetation Mapping set
forth in Section 6.3.1 of the MSHCP. No further action regarding this section
of the MSHCP is required.
8. The Project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines.
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2016-__
PAGE 4 OF 5
As stated above, the Property is surrounded by existing and planned
development. Therefore, the Fuels Management Guidelines as set forth in
Section 6.4 of the MSHCP are not applicable. No further action regarding this
section of the MSHCP is required.
9. The proposed project will be 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 Entitlement are consistent with all applicable provisions of the MSHCP.
No further actions related to the MSHCP are required.
SECTION 3. Based upon all of the evidence presented and the above findings,
the City Council hereby finds that the Project is consistent with the MSHCP.
SECTION 4. 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 City Council
of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, on the 23rd day of February, 2016.
Brian Tisdale, Mayor
City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Susan M. Domen, MMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________________
Barbara Leibold, City Attorney
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2016-__
PAGE 5 OF 5
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE }SS
I, Susan M. Domen, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, California,
hereby certify that Resolution No. 2016-__ was adopted by the City Council of the City of
Lake Elsinore at a regular meeting held on the 23rd day of February, 2016, by the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
___
Susan M. Domen, MMC, City Clerk