HomeMy WebLinkAbout0007_1_PA 2016-93 - SRPage 1 of 4
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
To:Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From:Grant Yates, City Manager
Prepared by: Justin Kirk, Principal Planner
Date:February 14, 2017
Subject:Planning Application No. 2016-93:A request by Calatlantic Homes for the
approval of building design and construction of 59 single-family residential units
ranging in size from 2,300 SF to 3,200 SF.
Recommendation
adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, FINDING THAT PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 2016-93 IS CONSISTENT WITH
THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN
(MSHCP); and,
adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 2016-93 PROVIDING BUILDING
DESIGNS FOR 59 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS RANGING IN SIZE FROM 2,300 SF
TO 3,200 SF LOCATED WITHIN TRACT 31920-11 OF THE SUMMERLY DEVELOPMENT OF
THE EAST LAKE SPECIFIC PLAN (APN: 371-040-013).
Background
The East Lake Specific Plan (ELSP) was adopted by Ordinance No. 955 by the City Council in
June 1993. The Plan consists of 3,000 acres and was originally divided into three individual
districts that included a Marina District, Lakeside Resort, and Recreation Village. Several
Amendments have been made to the East Lake Specific Plan as follows:
Amendments One and Two changed the central area or Phase One of the Specific Plan,
primarily it reduced the number of residential units and commercial uses and permitted a
golf course in the open space area of the plan.
Amendment No. 3 and No. 4 were related to industrial development along Corydon
Avenue and are both outside of Phase One.
Amendment No. 5 is the marina development located on Lakeshore Drive, known as
Waters Edge.
Page 2 of 4
Amendment No. 6 replaced multi-family uses with single-family uses, provided several
parks and added a 165-acre golf course, club house, and maintenance and golf cart
storage facility.
The proposed project is a continuation of a previously approved neighborhood in Summerly called
Monarch Grove, which was approved in 2014. The proposed development would largely continue
the same architectural and floor plans with modest modifications.
On January 17, 2017, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed Project
by a vote of 4-0.
Discussion
Project Request and Location
The applicant is requesting approval of building design and construction of 59 single family
residential units ranging in size from 2,300 SF to 3,200 SF located within Tract 31920-11 of the
Summerly Development of the East Lake Specific Plan (APN: 371-040-013).
Environmental Setting
EXISTING LAND USE ESLP No. 6 GENERAL PLAN
Project Site Vacant Low-Medium Residential Specific Plan
North Golf Course Open Space Specific Plan
South Vacant Low-Medium Residential Specific Plan
East Golf Course Open Space Specific Plan
West Residential Low-Medium Residential Specific Plan
Description of Residential Design Review No. 2016-20
The following describes the various design components and features of the proposed project,
including floor plans, architecture, model home complex, preliminary plotting of production units,
and the conceptual wall and fence plan.
Floor Plans
The proposed 59-unit project would offer three different plans, which are described as follows:
Plan 1: Single story 2,550 square foot units with 4 bedrooms; 2.5 baths; great room;
dining room, kitchen, breakfast nook, laundry, and two-car garage (optional den would
replace the fourth bedroom).
Plan 2: Two-story 2,842-3,040 (with optional bedroom) square foot units with 4
bedrooms; 2.5 baths; great room; dining room (optional den), kitchen, nook, laundry,
study (optional bedroom or bath), and three-car tandem garage (optional bedroom).
Plan 3: Two-story 3,184-3,402 (with optional bedroom) square foot units with 4
bedrooms, 3 baths, great room, formal dining room, kitchen, nook, home management
room, service room, loft (optional bedroom or bedroom suite), and three-car tandem
garage (option bedroom suite).
Page 3 of 4
The proposed 59-unit development will be developed with three plans; Plan 1 will account for 19
units (32%), Plan 2 will account for 20 units (34%), and Plan 3 will account for 20 units (34%).
The proposed plotting provides an appropriate mixture of plan and elevations types to ensure
variety in the streetscape.
Architecture and Treatments
The proposed project would offer three architectural styles and treatments for each of the floor
plans, including Spanish, Tuscan and Craftsman. The following describes each of these
architectural styles:
The Spanish Style includes concrete “S” tile roofs, decorative wrought iron & clay
pipes, shutters, stucco window trim, and arched entries.
The Tuscan Architectural Style includes concrete “S” tile roofs, projected wainscoting
stone veneer, decorative shutters, wood corbels, and vertical windows with stucco
trim.
The Craftsman Architectural Style includes concrete flat tile roofs, siding accents at
front gable ends, wood outlookers, pot shelves, decorative shutters, vertical windows
with stucco trim, columns and stone veneer.
Four-sided architectural treatments in the form of window surrounds will be provided for all the
proposed residences as a standard feature. In addition enhanced architectural treatments will be
provided on those elevations which are visible from public right of ways in the form of shutters.
Conceptual Wall and Fence Plan
To ensure design consistency, the Conceptual Wall and Fence Plan for the project shows that
those similar walls and fences that are provided elsewhere in the Summerly area will continue to
be provided with the proposed project. Perimeter walls will be decorative block with pilasters to
match the existing Summerly development. Front returns will be six-foot concrete block walls.
Interior fencing will be six-foot wood.
Landscaping
The proposed landscaping plan has been designed to complement the different architectural
styles. The proposed landscaping has been adequately designed to meet all water efficiency
standards.
Analysis
The proposed project has been reviewed for consistency with the General Plan, the Lake Elsinore
Municipal Code (LEMC), and the ESLP No. 6. The proposed project meets or exceedsall required
development standards as identified in the East Lake Specific Plan and the ESLP No. 6. The
original East Lake Specific Plan and the subsequent amendments were subject to a consistency
finding with the General Plan prior to adoption. The proposed project is consistent with the
provisions of the ESLP No. 6 and is therefore found to be consistent with the General Plan.
Building, Engineering, and Fire staff have reviewed the requested Design Review application and
have conditioned the project so as to mitigate any concerns. Overall the proposed project as
Page 4 of 4
designed and conditioned will provide a high quality and complimentary housing option to the
Summerly Development.
Environmental Determination
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 establishes the standard to be used when determining whether
subsequent environmental documentation is necessary. Section 15162 states that when an
environmental document has already been adopted for a project, no subsequent environmental
documentation is needed for subsequent entitlements which comprise the whole of the action
unless substantial changes or new information are presented by the project. A Supplemental
Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) was approved and adopted in 2004 for the East Lake
Specific Plan Amendment No. 6 (SHC #2003071050). The SEIR evaluated environmental
impacts that would result from maximum build-out of the Specific Plan. The Project does not
present substantial changes or new information regarding the potential environmental impacts of
development. Therefore, no additional CEQA documentation is necessary.
Fiscal Impact
The time and costs related to processing this Project have been covered by the Developer Deposit
paid for by the applicant. No General Fund budgets have been allocated or used in the processing
of this application. The approval of the Project does not fiscally impact the City’s General Fund.
Mitigation Measures to protect the City fiscally have already been included in the Conditions of
Approval.
Exhibits
A – MSHCP Resolution
B – RDR Resolution
C – Conditions of Approval
D – Vicinity Map
E – Aerial Map
F – Design Review Package