HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Reso No 2017-126 Finding that TTM No. 37381 is Consistent with MSHCPRESOLUTION NO. 2017 -126
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, FINDING THAT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 37381 IS
CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES
HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP)
Whereas, Nova Homes, Inc. has filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore (City)
requesting approval of Tentative Tract Map (TTM) No. 37381 for a subdivision of 19.54 acres into
73 single - family residential lots (ranging in size from 6,354 sq. ft. to 35,284 sq. ft.) and five (5)
lettered lots for open space and a water quality /detention basin (Project). The Project is located
southeasterly of Highway 74, westerly of Rosetta Canyon Drive, on the northern side of Third
Street within the Ramsgate Specific Plan. (APNs: 347 - 330 -001, 002, 065, 347 - 330 -067 through
073); and,
Whereas, Section 6.0 of the MSHCP requires that all discretionary projects within a 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,
Whereas, Section 6.0 of the MSHCP further requires that the City adopt consistency findings
demonstrating that the proposed discretionary entitlement complies with the MSHCP Criteria Cell,
and the MSHCP goals and objectives; and,
Whereas, pursuant to Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) Chapter 16.24 (Tentative Map) the
Planning Commission (Commission) has been delegated with the responsibility of making
recommendations to the City Council (Council) pertaining to tentative maps; and,
Whereas, on October 17, 2017 at a duly noticed Public Hearing the Commission has considered
evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with
respect to this item; and,
Whereas, pursuant to LEMC Section 16.24.120 the Council has the responsibility of making
decisions to approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove recommendations of the Commission
for tentative maps; and,
Whereas, on November 14, 2017, at a duly noticed Public Hearing, the Council has considered
the recommendation of the Commission as well as evidence presented by the Community
Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Council has considered the Project and its consistency with the MSHCP prior to
adopting Findings of Consistency with the MSHCP.
Section 2. That in accordance with the MSHCP, the 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.
Reso. No. 2017 -126
Page 2 of 4
Pursuant to the City's MSHCP Resolution, the Project is required to be reviewed for MSHCP
consistency, including consistency with other "Plan Wide Requirements." The Project site
is located not within a MSHCP Criteria Cell. The Ramsgate Specific Plan, Revision No. 6
(RSP#6) has gone through the review process to determine consistency with the MSHCP's
requirements, the Protection of Species Associated with Riparian /Riverine Areas and Vernal
Pool Guidelines (Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP), and payment of the MSHCP Local
Development Mitigation Fee (Section 4 of the MSHCP Ordinance).
2. The Project is subject to the City's LEAP and the Western Riverside County Regional
Conservation Authority's (RCA) Joint Project Review (JPR) processes.
The Project is located within the MSHCP Elsinore Area Plan but is not located in a Criteria
Cell Core or Linkage. Therefore, Project was not required to be processed through the City's
LEAP and JPR processes.
3. The Project is consistent with the Riparian /Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines.
The disturbed wetland onsite is considered riparian /riverine although none of the
riparian /riverine covered species have any potential to occur onsite. Seasonal ponds occur
onsite, some of which possess indicators of all three wetland parameters (soils, vegetation,
and hydrology). Wet season surveys for sensitive fairy shrimp were negative.
A Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP) analysis report
was prepared to address impacts to disturbed wetland which describes why avoidance of
seasonal disturbed wetland is not feasible or preferable quantifies unavoidable impacts
describes features and measures to reduce indirect effects and makes findings that
demonstrate that the project would be biologically equivalent or superior to an avoidance
alternative.
Because the disturbed wetland onsite is of low quality preservation of the disturbed wetland
is not considered feasible or desirable In order to avoid the disturbed wetland onsite a
minimum often percent (10) of the housing units would need to be eliminated. The resulting
preservation would leave small isolated disturbed wetland areas surrounded by housing
development that drain into existing residential development areas The alternative is not
considered feasible because a viable reserve cannot be reasonably implemented at this
location and superior mitigation options are available offsite that would provide for better
long -term conservation of the resources being impacted onsite.
Mitigation for impacts would include acquisition of 0.54 acre for restoration on property
known as the Cloverleaf in the southern end of Lake Elsinore or other offsite mitigation
parcels acceptable to the City and resource agencies. The riparian habitat restored within
the Cloverleaf site will be of a much higher quality than the disturbed wetland habitat being
impacted and will contribute to long -term MSHCP conservation goals The offsite acquisition
meets the definition of a Biologically Equivalent Preservation Alternative consistent with
Section 6.1.2.
4. The Project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines.
The Project site is not located within the Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Areas as
shown on Figure 6 -1 of the MSHCP. The Project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow
Reso. No. 2017 -126
Page 3 of 4
Endemic Plant Species Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP.
5. The propose project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures.
The Property is outside of any Criteria Area Species Survey Area for plants, amphibians,
and mammals. No Criteria Area Species Survey Area plant species were observed during
site surveys. The Property occurs within the burrowing owl survey area. No owls were
observed during surveys onsite. Therefore, the Ramsgate Applications are consistent with
MSHCP Section 6.3.2.
6. The Project is consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines.
Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP sets forth guidelines which are intended to address indirect
effects associated with locating development in proximity to the MSHCP Conservation Area
where applicable. To minimize Edge Effects, guidelines shall be implemented in conjunction
with review of individual public and private development projects in proximity to the MSHCP
Conservation Area. The Property is not located adjacent to conserved land or other
applicable open space. Therefore, an assessment of indirect impacts associated with the
Urban /Wildlands Interface is not required.
7. The Project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements.
The Ramsgate Specific Plan, Revision No. 6 (RSP No. 6) was subject to the Protection of
Species Associated with Riparian /Riverine and Vernal Pool policies. Any related resources
were mapped as part of the Determination of Biological Equivalent or Superior Preservation
submittal. The Project is consistent with MSHCP Section 6.3.1.
8. The Project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines.
The Project is conditioned to provide a buffer to the open space area that will function as a
Fuel Modification Zone. Therefore, the Project is consistent with the Fuels Management
Guidelines of MSHCP Section 6.4.
9. The Project will be conditioned to pay the City's MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee.
As a condition of approval, the Project will be required to pay the City's MSHCP Local
Development Mitigation Fee at the time of issuance of building permits.
10. The Project is consistent with the MSHCP.
Section 3. Based upon the evidence presented, both written and testimonial, and the above
findings, the Council hereby finds that the Project is consistent with the MSHCP.
Section 4. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
Section 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book
of original Resolutions.
Reso. No. 2017 -126
Page 4 of 4
Passed and Adopted on this 14th day of November, 2017.
Attest:
Sus-an-M. Domen, MMC
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE )
I, Susan M. Domen, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, do hereby certify
that Resolution No. 2017 -126 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore,
California, at the regular meeting of November 14, 2017, and that the same was adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Manos, Hickman and Tisdale; Mayor Pro Tern Johnson and Mayor Magee
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Susan M. Domen, MMC
City Clerk