Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem No. 17 PA 2017-018 TTM 31920 SummerlyText File City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 www.lake-elsinore.org File Number: ID# 17-643 Agenda Date: 4/24/2018 Status: Public HearingVersion: 1 File Type: ReportIn Control: City Council / Successor Agency Agenda Number: 17) Page 1 City of Lake Elsinore Printed on 4/19/2018 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:April 24, 2018 PROJECT: Planning Application 2017-018: A proposed amendment to Tentative Tract Map (TTM) 31920 to increase the developable lots by 84 units from 156 to 238 units and to modify the TTM to accommodate the increased number of units. (Summerly) APPLICANT: Brian Milich, Pacific Ventures, Management, LLC Recommendation ADOPT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING FINDINGS THAT PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 2017-18 (TTM 31920) 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 APPROVING A REVISION TO TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 31920. Project Request/Location The applicant is requesting approval of a revision to Tentative Tract Map (TTM) 31920, specifically remapping lots 23, 26 and 27, which would increase the total number of residential lots by 84 units going from 156 to 238 units. Minimum lot sizes would be reduced from 5,000 SF to 3,300 SF. The proposed project is located within the Summerly Development of the East Lake Specific Plan (ELSP) and is located on lots 23, 26 and 27 of TTM 31920 and is more specifically referred to as APNs: 371-270-014, 017, and 018. Environmental Setting EXISTING LAND USE ZONING GENERAL PLAN Project Site Vacant Low Medium Residential (LMD)Specific Plan North Golf Course Recreation Specific Plan South Vacant LMD Specific Plan East Park/SFD REC ESLP/LMD Specific Plan West Interim construction site Preservation/Mitigation Specific Plan Background The ELSP was adopted by the City in 1993 and originally included 3,000 acres that would allow PA 2017-018 TTM 31920 Modification Page 2 of 5 for a total of up to 9,000 residential units. There have been 10 subsequent amendments to the Specific Plan that were approved and adopted. Most recently, the City Council approved Amendment No. 11, which is a comprehensive specific plan, which consolidated all previous iterations of the ELSP and updated the plan as follows: Overhaul land uses, development regulations, and architectural guidelines along with updating circulation and drainage. Streamline the development process in order to stimulate private sector investment. Create a user-friendly East Lake Specific Plan document. Protect the natural resources in the Lake’s Back Basin. Maintain flood storage capacity. Anticipate changing marketplace demand and public need by providing flexibility in implementation. Ensure that the City’s “Action Sports Capital of the World” and “Dream Extreme” activities have a permanent location in the City. Planning Commission The Planning Commission at its March 6, 2018, regular meeting took unanimous action to recommend approval of the proposed map amendment to the City Council. City Council The City Council at its March 13, 2018, regular meeting took action to continue the item. Project Description The proposed revision to TTM 31920 includes the remapping lots 23, 25 and 27. The applicant since the continued public hearing further modified the proposed revised map to increase the minimum lot size to 3,500 SF and provided additional recreational amenities in the form of Summerly Community Association owned neighborhood trail connections and view/overlook walks within easements in these new neighborhoods and final development phase. These trail and view/overlook amenities will be landscaped and enhanced for use by the Summerly homeowners. The proposed subdivided lots range in size from 9,058 SF to 3,501 SF, with an average size of 4,345 SF. The proposed subdivision has a density 6.9 dwelling units per acre. Table 1 identifies the maximum, minimum and average lot sizes by lot and for the total proposed map revision: Table - 1 PA 2017-18 Remapping Detail Lot Minimum Maximum Average 23 3,501 SF 6,533 SF 4,130 SF 25 3,760 SF 6,649 SF 4,029 SF 27 4,500 SF 9,058 SF 4,957 SF Average 3,920 SF 7,413 SF 4,372 SF The proposed project would not permit any new construction. Subsequent entitlement approvals are required prior to the construction of any new residential units. Subsequent entitlements will focus on design review of future residential development. PA 2017-018 TTM 31920 Modification Page 3 of 5 Analysis Under East Lake Specific Plan Amendment #11, the Summerly Residential Neighborhood as implemented by TTM 31920 includes two residential densities, recreational facilities, landscaping lots and public streets, as detailed in Table 2. Table 2 - Summerly Residential Neighborhood Development Summary Land Use Maximum Dwelling Units Average Density1 Number of Lots Area (Acres) Low-Medium Density Residential (up to 6 du/ac)1,979 8.2 1,979 242.17Medium Density Residential (up to 14 du) Neighborhood Focal Parks 3 2.86 Central Neighborhood Park and Recreation Facility 1 3.93 HOA Landscape Lots 14 1.37 Public Streets 68.26 1 Average density calculated on residential acreage only. Due to the dual zoning designation identified for the Summerly Residential Neighborhood, application of either the Low-Medium Density Residential or Medium Density Residential are appropriate if the overall maximum density of development does not exceed 1,979 dwelling units. Due to the 1,979 unit cap not being exceeded, the Medium Density Residential designation is applicable for the evaluation for the creation of lots. The original approval of TTM 31920 mapped a total 1,483 dwelling units, SPA 10 increased the total to 1,500 dwelling units and SPA 6A increased the total to 1,595 dwelling units. The proposed map amendment would increase the total to 1,677 dwelling units. Due to the development not exceeding the cap of 1,979 dwelling units the applicability of the Medium Density Residential development standards are appropriate when evaluating the revised map. Medium Density Residential has specific development standards applicable to the creation of lots as detailed in Table 3. Table 3 - Medium Density Residential Development Standards Development Criteria Standard Proposed Density Up to 14 du/ac 6.9 du/ac Lot Area Minimum 3,300 SF 3,501 SF Minimum Lot Width 46’-0”46’-0” The proposed map revision has been found consistent with the development criteria for the creation of lots in the Medium Density Residential land use designation. Additionally, project- wide development standards have also been prepared to complement those described in the Medium Density Residential standards. Those applicable to subdivision of land include the following criteria: Development does not exceed development caps Uses shall comply with the requirements of the ESLP Lots created shall conform to the ELSP, applicable City standards or State law and shall not include flag lots Compliance with current WQMP and MS4 permit requirements Common open space PA 2017-018 TTM 31920 Modification Page 4 of 5 Infrastructure commensurate with the impacts of the proposed development and adequate phasing to ensure the infrastructure is constructed to mitigate potential impacts Pay applicable development fees Implementation of mitigation measures identified in the ELSP Amendment #11 EIR As previously detailed, the proposed project does not include development that is in excess of the development cap of the Summerly Residential Neighborhood of 1,979 units and has been designed in a manner consistent with the requirements of the ELSP. The proposed project has been conditioned to meet the current WQMP and MS4 permit requirements, subsequent design review applications will require the approval of amendments to the approved Preliminary WQMP to demonstrate compliance with the new WQMP and MS4 requirements. The proposed map revision does not create significant new traffic and will be accommodated by the existing and to be constructed infrastructure for the Summerly Residential Neighborhood. The proposed project is subject to a previously approved Development Agreement, which specifies applicable development fees and the timing of the payment of those fees. Consistent with certain protections provided in the Development Agreement, the proposed project has been conditioned to implement the applicable mitigation measures identified in the ELSP Amendment #11 EIR. In accordance with the Development Agreement and conditions of approval of TTM 31920, the project areas have been previously annexed to applicable maintenance and public safety financing districts and would not be required to annex into CFD 2015-01 or 2015-02. Overall, the project proposes increased densities of residential development within an existing residential community. The proposed smaller lots would not be discernable from the public right of ways as the minimum lot widths are consistent with the other areas of the community. Setbacks to garages would maintain a minimum of 18’-0” distance, thereby minimizing potential impacts to roadways. The increased density would also create a different lot configuration than what is standardly available in the Summerly Residential Neighborhood. Because the project meets all the development criteria established by the ELSP Amendment # 11 for new lots, it is consistent with the project-wide development standards and the project creates a differing product type while not altering the existing streetscape or creating adverse impacts. Staff recommends approval. Environmental Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, staff has determined the proposed Project would not have a significant effect on the environment and no new environmental documentation is necessary because all potentially significant effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier Environmental Impact Report “EIR” (SCH #2016111029). All potentially significant impacts upon Aesthetics, Biological Resources, Cultural, Paleontological and Tribal Resources, Geology, Soils and Seismicity, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality will be mitigated to below a level of significance through compliance with the mitigation measures set forth in the EIR. The EIR also determined that the proposed Project would have significant and unavoidable project-level and cumulative impacts related to Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Noise, Transportation and Circulation which cannot be mitigated to below a level of significance, resulting in the adoption of a Statement of Overriding. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 no substantial changes, which require major revisions to the EIR, exist, and no new information of substantial importance, which require revisions to the earlier EIR, exist. Therefore, no further environmental documentation is necessary. PA 2017-018 TTM 31920 Modification Page 5 of 5 Fiscal Impact The developer deposit account, paid for by the applicant, has covered the time and costs related to processing this Project. No funds have been allocated or used in the processing of this application from the General Fund. 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. TTM Resolution C. Conditions of Approval D. Vicinity Maps E. Aerial Maps F. Revised TTM 31920 G. Average Lot Size Comparison H. Applicant Prepared Detail of Map Modifications RESOLUTION NO. 2018- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING FINDINGS THAT PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 2017-18 (TTM 31920) IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP) Whereas, Brian Milich, DMB Pacific Ventures, has filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore requesting approval of a modification to Tentative Tract Map No. 31920 for a project site located within the East Lake Specific Plan (the “Project”); and, Whereas, Section 6.0 of the 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, 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 cell criteria, and the MSHCP goals and objectives; and, Whereas,pursuant to Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) Chapter 16.24 (Tentative Maps) the Planning Commission (Commission) has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council (Council) pertaining to the residential design review; and, Whereas,the East Lake Specific Plan (ELSP) is partially covered by two distinct MSHCP criteria cells: approximately three (3) acres of the ELSP are within cell 4846 and approximately three tenths (0.3) of an acre are within cell 4937; and, Whereas,the Project site is within the boundaries of the ESLP that are covered by the aforementioned cell sites; and, Whereas,on March 6, 2018, at a duly noticed Public Hearing the Commission considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item and recommended that the City Council find that the project is consistent with the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan ; and, Whereas,pursuant to LEMC Chapter 16.24 (Tentative Maps) the Council has the responsibility of making decisions to approve, modify, or disapprove recommendations of the Commission for variance applications; and, Whereas,on April 24, 2018, at a duly noticed Public Meeting, 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. CC Reso. No. 2018-____ Page 2 of 4 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. Pursuant to the City’s MSHCP Resolution, the Project must be reviewed for MSHCP consistency, which review shall include an analysis of the Project’s consistency with other “Plan Wide Requirements.” The Project is located within the ELSP area, specifically within the ELSP Amendment No. 6 area. Prior to the City’s adoption of the MSHCP, there were a series of meetings between the County of Riverside, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and California Department of Fish and Game to discuss conservation measures within the ELSP and to decide how to ensure development within the ELSP could proceed consistently with the MSHCP and with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 permit. It was determined that a target acreage of 770 acres was warranted for MSHCP conservation in the back basin area of the City. The Project site is within the ELSP and is covered by that conservation agreement. Part of the conservation agreement also included a requirement that projects in the back basin area be consistent with the other “Plan Wide Requirements” set forth in the following sections of the MSHCP: Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines (MSHCP, § 6.1.2), Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines (MSHCP, § 6.1.3), Additional Survey Needs and Procedures (MSHCP, § 6.3.2), Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines (MSHCP, § 6.1.4), Vegetation Mapping (MSHCP, § 6.3.1) requirements, Fuels Management Guidelines (MSHCP, § 6.4), and payment of the MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee (MSHCP Ordinance, § 4). The Project has been reviewed in light of these sections and is consistent therewith. 2. The Project is subject to the City’s LEAP and the County’s Joint Project Reviewprocesses. The ELSP MSHCP consistency determination was submitted to the County of Riverside in October 2003, prior to the initiation of the City’s LEAP and County’s Joint Project Review process. Nevertheless, both the City and Dudek (acting on behalf of the County) agreed that the Project was consistent with the MSHCP due to the extensive acreage set aside for conservation. The Project has not been modified and was part of the overall ELSP which has been determined to be consistent with the MSHCP. 3. The Project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines. The previously approved ELSP No. 6 was determined to be consistent with the Riparian/Riverine and Vernal Pool Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP. The scope and nature of the Project have not been modified from that which was previously approved and is therefore consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines. 4. The Project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines. The previously approved ELSP No. 6 was consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP. The Project has not been modified from that which was previously approved under the ELSP CC Reso. No. 2018-____ Page 3 of 4 Amendment No. 6. Additionally, based upon prior approvals, the entire Project site has been graded and any plant species which may have existed on the site have been removed and replaced with development. It is for these reasons that the Project is consistent with the aforementioned guidelines. 5. The Project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures. The previously approved ELSP No. 6 was consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures as set forth in Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP. The Project has not been modified from that which was previously approved under the ELSP Amendment No. 6, and the entire project site has been graded pursuant to previously issued permits. The Project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures of the MSHCP. 6. The Project is consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines. The previously approved ELSP No. 6 was consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP. Because the Project has not been modified from that which was previously approved under the ELSP No. 6, no further MSHCP review is necessary and the Project is consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines. 7. The Project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements. The previously approved ELSP No. 6 was consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements as set forth in Section 6.3.1 of the MSHCP. Mapping was conducted as part of the biological surveys for the original project. The Project has not been modified from that which was previously approved and therefore is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements. 8. The Project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines. The previously approved ELSP No. 6 was consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.4 of the MSHCP. The Project site is not within or adjacent to conservation areas where the Fuels Management Guidelines would be required. The Project has not been modified from that which was previously approved and therefore is consistent with the Fuel Management Guidelines. 9. The Project overall is consistent with the MSHCP. As stated in No. 1 above, the Project is within the ELSP area which has previously been determined to be 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. CC Reso. No. 2018-____ Page 4 of 4 Passed and Adopted on this 24 h day of April, 2018. _____________________________ Natasha Johnson, Mayor Attest: ____________________________ Susan 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-____ was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, at the regular meeting of April 24, 2018, and that the same was adopted by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Susan M. Domen, MMC City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 2018- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVING A REVISION TO TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 31920. Whereas, Brian Milich, DMB Pacific Ventures, has filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore requesting approval of a modification to Tentative Tract Map No. 31920 for a project site located within the East Lake Specific Plan (the “Project”); and, Whereas,pursuant to Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) Chapter 16.24 (Tentative Maps) the Planning Commission (Commission) has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council (Council) pertaining to the residential design review; and, Whereas,on March 6, 2018, at a duly noticed Public Hearing the Commission considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item and recommended that the City Council approve the proposed map amendment ; and, Whereas,pursuant to LEMC Chapter 16.24 (Tentative Maps) the Council has the responsibility of making decisions to approve, modify, or disapprove recommendations of the Commission for variance applications; and, Whereas,on April 24, 2018, at a duly noticed Public Meeting, 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. Prior to making a recommendation to the City Council, the Planning Commission has reviewed and analyzed the revision to Tract Map No. 31920 pursuant to the appropriate Planning and Zoning Laws, and Chapter 16 (Subdivisions) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (“LEMC”). Section 2. The Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that the revision to Tentative Tract Map No. 31920 is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000 et seq.: “CEQA”) and the Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000 et seq.: “CEQA Guidelines”). Specifically, the Planning Commission finds that determined the proposed Project would not have a significant effect on the environment and no new environmental documentation is necessary because all potentially significant effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier Environmental Impact Report “EIR” (SCH #2016111029). All potentially significant impacts upon Aesthetics, Biological Resources, Cultural, Paleontological and Tribal Resources, Geology, Soils and Seismicity, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality will be mitigated to below a level of significance through compliance with the mitigation measures set forth in the EIR. The EIR also determined that the proposed Project would have significant and unavoidable project-level and cumulative impacts related to Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Noise, Transportation and Circulation which cannot be mitigated to below a level of significance, resulting in the adoption of a Statement of Overriding. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 no substantial changes, which require major revisions to the EIR, exist, and no new information of substantial importance, which require revisions to the earlier EIR, exist. Therefore, no further environmental documentation is necessary. CC Reso. No. 2018-____ Page 2 of 3 Section 3. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning Law and the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, the Planning Commission makes the following findings for approval of a revision to Tentative Tract Map No. 31920: 1.The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed subdivision is compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan (Government Code Section 66473.5). The General Plan designates the site for a mixed land use Specific Plan. Consistent with that designation, the revised Tract Map can accommodate future residential land uses. The Tract Map is consistent with the designated land use, development and design standards, and all other appropriate requirements contained in the General Plan, the East Lake Specific Plan and Subdivision Map Act. 2.The effects this project is likely to have upon the housing needs of the region, the public service requirements of its residents and the available fiscal and environmental resources have been considered and balanced. The modified Tract Map is consistent with the land use plan, development and design standards, and programs, and all other appropriate requirements contained in the General Plan. The modified Tentative Tract Map No. 31920 is consistent with the residential land uses within the specific plan and applicable development and design standards. 3.Subject to the attached conditions of approval, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in any significant environmental impact. The project has been adequately conditioned by all applicable departments and agencies and will not therefore result in any significant environmental impacts. Furthermore environmental clearance and analysis for the proposed application is provided by EIR (SCH #2016111029)which was approved and adopted in 2017 for the East Lake Specific Plan Amendment No. 11. The EIR evaluated environmental impacts that would result from maximum build-out of the Specific Plan. The Project does not present changes or new information regarding the potential environmental impacts of development. No further environmental clearance is necessary. Section 3:Based upon the evidence presented, the above findings, and the attached conditions of approval, Council approves the modification to Tentative Tract Map No. 31920. 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. Passed and Adopted on this 24 th day of April, 2018. _____________________________ Natasha Johnson, Mayor CC Reso. No. 2018-____ Page 3 of 3 Attest: ____________________________ Susan 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. 2018-____ was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, at the regular meeting of April 24, 2018, and that the same was adopted by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Susan M. Domen, MMC City Clerk Applicant’s Initials: _____Page 1 of 6 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESOLUTIONS:2018-XX & 2018-XX PROJECT: PA 2017-18/TTM 31920 Revision PROJECT NAME:Summerly Modification PROJECT LOCATION:APNs: 371-270-014, 017, and 018 APPROVAL DATE: EFFECTIVE DATE: GENERAL 1.The proposed project consists of a request by Pacific Ventures Management, LLC for the approval of an amendment to TTM 31920, which would increase the number of mapped lots by 84 (from 156 to 240 lots) on lots 23, 26 and 27 (also known as DDA Phase G) within the Summerly Development (APNs: 371-270-014, 017, and 018) (“Project”). (Technical amendment made by staff after Planning Commission action.) 2.The applicant shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its Officials, Officers, Employees, Agents, and its Consultants (Indemnitees) from any claim, action, or proceeding against the Indemnitees to attack, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning PA 2017-18/ TTM 31920 Revision, including the approval, extension or modification of or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done, or made prior to the decision, or to determine the reasonableness, legality or validity of any condition attached thereto. The applicant's indemnification is intended to include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against or incurred by Indemnitees and costs of suit, claim or litigation, including without limitation attorneys' fees, penalties and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred by Indemnitees in connection with such proceeding. The City will promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City. If the Project is challenged in court, the City and the applicant shall enter into formal defense and indemnity agreement, consistent with this condition. 3.Within 30 days of Project approval, the applicant shall sign and complete an "Acknowledgment of Conditions" and shall return the executed original to the Community Development Department for inclusion in the case records. 4.This Project shall comply with the Conditions of Approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 31920; provided, however, that the applicant shall additionally comply with all and applicable laws, including current requirements of the LEMC and East Lake Specific Plan (ELSP) Amendment No. 11 for that portion of the Project, if any, that is not within the vested rights provisions of inconsistent withthe First Amended and Restated Development Agreement by and between applicant’s predecessor Laing-CP Lake Elsinore LLC and the City of Lake Elsinore dated as of August 24, 2004 and implementing Operating Memoranda of Understanding, and the DA Settlement Agreement (collectively, “Development Agreement”) or the DA Settlement Agreement. (Technical amendment made by staff after Planning Commission action.) Conditions of Approval Planning Commission: March 6, 2018 PA 2017-18/ TTM 31920 Revision City Council: March 13, 2018 Applicant’s Initials: _____Page 2 of 6 5.The total number dwelling units in this Project shall not exceed 240, any increase in the total number of dwelling units above 240 will be subject to future review and approval via a TTM revision and, if necessary, a Specific Plan Amendment. 6.All subsequent Residential Design Review applications for lots 23, 26 and 27 of TTM 31920 shall conform to the land use & development regulations of the Summerly Medium Density Residential land use designation as detailed in Amendment No. 11 of the ELSP. 7.All subsequent Residential Design Review applications for lots 23, 26 and 27 of TTM 31920 shall conform to all architectural guidelines & development standards as detailed in Amendment No. 11 of the ELSP and to applicable standards and guidelines relating to signs, landscaping, parking and other design elements in conformance with the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code in effect at time of permit application. PLANNING DIVISION 8.All lots on lots 23, 26 and 27 of TTM 31920 shall comply with the minimum standards of the Summerly Medium Density Residential land use designation as detailed in Amendment No. 11 of the ELSP and if applicable, standards of the LEMC that are not specified in the ELSP , if any, and only to the extent not inconsistent with the vested rights provisions of the First Amended and Restated Development Agreement by and between applicant’s predecessor Laing-CP Lake Elsinore LLC and the City of Lake Elsinore dated as of August 24, 2004 and implementing Operating Memoranda of Understanding (collectively, “Development Agreement”) or the DA Settlement Agreement. Sections 2.5.5.1, 2.5.5.2, 3.2 and 8 and Table 2-9 of Amendment No. 11 of the ELSP. (Technical amendment made by staff after Planning Commission action.) 9. The developer shall comply with applicable Mitigation Measures from the Mitigation Monitoring Programs (MMPs) adopted as part of the previously certified SEIRs, associated with the East Lake Specific Plan Amendments No. 6 (SCH # 2003071050) and No. 11 (SCH # 2016111029), if any, and only to the extent not inconsistent with the vested rights provisions of the First Amended and Restated Development Agreement by and between applicant’s predecessor Laing-CP Lake Elsinore LLC and the City of Lake Elsinore dated as of August 24, 2004 and implementing Operating Memoranda of Understanding (collectively, “Development Agreement”) or the DA 11 (SCH # 2016111029) not inconsistent with the Development Agreement. (Technical amendment made by staff after Planning Commission action.) 10.Applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. 11.Applicant shall pay all applicable fees and obtain proper clearance from the Lake Elsinore Unified School District (LEUSD) prior to the issuance of building permits. 12.Applicant shall meet all requirements of the providing electric utility company. 13.Applicant shall meet all requirements of the providing gas utility company. Conditions of Approval Planning Commission: March 6, 2018 PA 2017-18/ TTM 31920 Revision City Council: March 13, 2018 Applicant’s Initials: _____Page 3 of 6 14.Applicant shall meet all requirements of the providing telephone utility company. ENGINEERING DIVISION 15.A precise survey with closures for boundaries and all lots shall be provided per the LEMC. 16.Prior to the issuance of a building permit for production lots, a final map shall be approved and recorded. 17.Prior to the recordation of a subdivision map or prior to the approval of permits within Lots 23, 26 and 27, whichever occurs first, storm drain improvements connecting to the open space lots (Lot 38) shall be constructed, or provide evidence of financial security. 18.Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall submit a letter of verification (will-serve letter) to the City Engineer, for all required utility services. 19.The applicant shall comply with the following City programs: the City Source Reduction and Recycling Element and Household Hazardous Waste Element, the County Solid Waste Management Plan and Integrated Waste Management Plan. Stormwater Management / Pollutant Prevention / NPDES Design 20.The Project is responsible for complying with the Santa Ana Region NPDES Permits as warranted based on the nature of development and/or activity. These Permits include but are not limited to: General Permit – Construction Deminimus Discharges MS4 21.In accordance with XII.L, the Project is considered a “Pre-Approved Project” not subject to the requirements in R-2010-0033. The Project shall prepare and submit for plan check review an amendment to the existing WQMP. 22.The Amendment shall follow the 2009 WQMP Template and Guidance and include: Detailed site and Project description. Potential stormwater pollutants. Structural and Non-Structural source control BMPs. Updated site design and drainage plan (BMP Exhibit). Documentation of how vector issues are addressed in the BMP design, operation and maintenance. GIS Decimal Minute Longitude and Latitude coordinates for all Treatment Control BMP locations. Evaluation documentation of the sufficiency of the existing and planned treatment control BMPs to treat the pollutants of concern to a medium to high level prior to discharge into the storm drain system. Conditions of Approval Planning Commission: March 6, 2018 PA 2017-18/ TTM 31920 Revision City Council: March 13, 2018 Applicant’s Initials: _____Page 4 of 6 23.The WQMP Amendment shall be approved by the City prior to rough or precise grading plan approval and issuance of ANY permit for construction. 24.Project hardscape areas shall be designed and constructed to provide for drainage into adjacent landscape, where feasible. 25.If CEQA identifies resources requiring Clean Water Act Section 401 Permitting, the applicant shall obtain certification through the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board and provide a copy to the Engineering Division. 26.All storm drain inlet facilities shall be appropriately marked “Only Rain in the Storm Drain” using the City authorized marker. Construction 27.A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) (as required by the NPDES General Construction Permit) and compliance with the Green Building Code for sediment and erosion control are required for this Project. 28.Prior to grading or building permit for construction or demolition and/or weed abatement activity projects subject to coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit shall demonstrate that compliance with the permit has been obtained by providing a copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board and a copy of the notification of the issuance of a Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) Number or other proof of filing to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. A copy of the SWPPP shall be kept at the Project site, updated, and be available for review upon request. 29.Erosion & Sediment Control –- Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permit for construction or demolition, the applicant shall submit for review and approval by the City Engineer, an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan as a separate sheet of the grading plan submittal to demonstrate compliance with the City’s NPDES Program and state water quality regulations for grading and construction activities. The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan shall identify how all construction materials, wastes, grading or demolition debris, and stockpiles of soil, aggregates, soil amendments, etc. shall be property covered, stored and secured to prevent transport into local drainages or waters by wind, rain, tracking, or dispersion. The plan shall also describe how the Project will ensure that all BMPs will be maintained during construction of any future right of ways. A copy of the plan shall be incorporated into the SWPPP as applicable, kept updated as needed to address changing circumstances of the Project site, be kept at the Project site and available for review upon request. 30.Minimum BMP’s as identified by the City shall be implemented by the Projects. Post-Construction 31.Prior to the issuance of a certificate of use and/or occupancy, the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with applicable NPDES permits for construction, MS4, etc. to include: Demonstrate that the Project has complied with all non-structural BMPs described in the Project’s WQMP. Conditions of Approval Planning Commission: March 6, 2018 PA 2017-18/ TTM 31920 Revision City Council: March 13, 2018 Applicant’s Initials: _____Page 5 of 6 Provide signed, notarized certification from the engineer of work that the structural BMP’s identified in the Project’s WQMP are installed and operational in conformance with approved plans and specifications. Submit a copy of the fully executed, approved HOA budget specifically identifying budget specifically identifying and funding HOA responsibilities for: 1) maintenance of the CDS Units and 71 acre perimeter fence, and 2) annual vector inspection, repair of rodent holes/burrows, and treatment by Northwest Mosquito and Vector Control District or other entity acceptable to the City. [Note: The City will be responsible for the cost of repairs to the 71 acre perimeter fence resulting from vehicular accidents along Cereal Road and Lucerne Street.] Provide documentation of funding mechanism acceptable to the Director of Administrative Services or written acceptance by the applicant for the funding of annual City maintenance of the water quality facilities within the 71 acre area. City maintenance responsibilities include semi-annual inspections of the seasonal extended detention basin/wet pond and implementation of corrective measures and/or notification to responsible parties in accordance with the CC&Rs and applicable permits. Demonstrate that copies of the Project’s approved WQMP) are available for the HOA. Provide the City with a digital .pdf copy of the approved WQMP Amendment. (Amended by the Planning Commission on March 6, 2018) (Technical amendment made by staff after Planning Commission action.) 32.Provide a signed/sealed certification from a civil engineer dated 12 months after last certificate of occupancy certifying the water quality facilities constructed (CDS Units and Seasonal Extended Detention Basin/Wet Pond) are functional and in compliance with the Amended WQMP. FIRE CONDITIONS 33.This Project shall comply with the applicable Conditions of Approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 31920, if any, and only to the extent not inconsistent with the vested rights provisions of the First Amended and Restated Development Agreement by and between applicant’s predecessor Laing-CP Lake Elsinore LLC and the City of Lake Elsinore dated as of August 24, 2004 and implementing Operating Memoranda of Understanding (collectively, “Development Agreement”) or the DA Settlement not inconsistent with the Development Agreement. (Technical amendment made by staff after Planning Commission action.) Conditions of Approval Planning Commission: March 6, 2018 PA 2017-18/ TTM 31920 Revision City Council: March 13, 2018 Applicant’s Initials: _____Page 6 of 6 I hereby state that I acknowledge receipt of the approved Conditions of Approval for the above named Project and do hereby agree to accept and abide by all Conditions of Approval as approved by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore on ______________. I also acknowledge that all Conditions shall be met as indicated. Date: Applicant’s Signature: Print Name: Address: Phone Number: DIAMOND DRI 1 5 MALAGA RD MI SSI ON TRLCASIN O D R VILLAGE PKWYGR A P E S T H I D D E N T R LE LM STLINE DRBASEBALL MASCOT PETE LEHR DR MEADOW STADIUM H I D D E N T R LDIAMOND DRI 1 5 MALAGA RD MI SSI ON TRLCASIN O D R VILLAGE PKWYGR A P E S T H I D D E N T R LE LM STLINE DRBASEBALL MASCOT PETE LEHR DR MEADOW STADIUM H I D D E N T R L PLANNING APPLIC ATION 20 17-18VICINITY MAP PR OJEC T SITE ´ DIAMOND DRI 1 5 MALAGA RD MI SSI ON TRLCASIN O D R VILLAGE PKWYGR A P E S T H I D D E N T R LE LM STLINE DRBASEBALL MASCOT PETE LEHR DR MEADOW STADIUM H I D D E N T R L Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, Earthstar Geographics,CNES/Airbus DS, U SDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN,IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User CommunityDIAMOND DRI 1 5 MALAGA RD MI SSI ON TRLCASIN O D R VILLAGE PKWYGR A P E S T H I D D E N T R LE LM STLINE DRBASEBALL MASCOT PETE LEHR DR MEADOW STADIUM H I D D E N T R L Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, Earthstar Geographics,CNES/Airbus DS, U SDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN,IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community PLANNING APPLIC ATION 20 17-18AERIAL MAP PR OJEC T SITE ´ CORPORATIONWILSON MIKAMI CORPORATIONWILSON MIKAMI CORPORATIONWILSON MIKAMI CORPORATIONWILSON MIKAMI CORPORATIONWILSON MIKAMI CORPORATIONWILSON MIKAMI CORPORATIONWILSON MIKAMI CORPORATIONWILSON MIKAMI CORPORATIONWILSON MIKAMI CORPORATIONWILSON MIKAMI CORPORATIONWILSON MIKAMI Page 1 of 6 SUMMERLY TENTATIVE MAP AMENDMENT (“TMA”) Lots 23 (Unit 20), 26 (Unit 23) and 27 (Unit 25) Summary of Original Request And Changes Made to Address Questions on Lot Size April 10, 2018 Page 2 of 6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Proposed Tentative Map Amendment is aligned with continuing the tradition of quality development in the City of Lake Elsinore that Summerly and Pacific Ventures are now very well known for. The following are the proposal’s key points  Summerly’s request is another example of Pacific Venture’s continuing commitment to its homeowners and to the City of Lake Elsinore—to over deliver on our commitment.  The reason for this request is quite simple: as in all master planned communities, and Summerly is no exception, a diversity in lot, home and architectural choice is key to any community’s success in meeting a healthy diversity of buyer life stages and lifestyle choices.  Summerly is rebalancing its lot and home choices in this final phase of development ina smuch as the current plan has excessive lot and architectural overlap and is devoid of that diversity. Simply put, not all homebuyers want large yards to maintain, especially in a community that is so full of amenities.  This proposal will also provide 82 additional new homes for families with substantial incomes, incomes that are anticipated to be equal or greater than Linden Pointe—this is good for Summerly, but even better for the City as a whole supporting schools, retail and the community.  Summerly will remain more than 300 units below the 1,979 units allowed in the East Lake Specific Plan Amendment #11 , which Summerly’s roads, infrastructure and parks were designed to support  Pacific Ventures is proud of what Summerly has already become, but even more proud of the legacy that it will leave behind. Page 3 of 6 BACKGROUND 2016 Staff Recommends, Planning Commission approved and City Council unanimously approved Linden Pointe (Unit 24) with minimum lot size 3,525 SF. May 2017 Summerly submitted a request for an amendment to its tentative tract map and an amendment to the East Lake Specific Plan. This request was to modify the lots sizes in two of the seven neighborhoods in the final phase of Summerly in order to avoid excessive lot and home size overlap in this final phase by providing a better diversity of lot sizes and, therefore, architectural style and floor plans for improved lifestyle choice based on consistent market demand. The request added 84 lots to Summerly, bringing the Summerly community to a total 1,679 units, 300 homes under the 1,979 units that is allowed by the East Lake Specific Plan. August 2017 Linden Pointe opens and becomes the top-selling neighborhood in Summerly and one of its most charming. November 2017 The City initiated East Lake Specific Plan Amendment #11 was adopted by the City Council. Importantly, because the East Lake Specific Plan Amendment #11 was adopted by the City Council in November 2017, Summerly no longer needed a Specific Plan Amendment. The City initiated amendment of the East Lake Specific Plan anticipated and provided for the lot configurations that Summerly was requesting. Therefore staff removed the Summerly initiated Specific Plan amendment and the request now is only for a tentative map amendment. March 6, 2018 The Planning Commission unanimously approved staff’s recommendation to adopt resolutions supporting Summerly’s tentative map amendment. There was no public opposition. March 12, 2018 Lake Elsinore City Council continued action on Summerly’s tentative map amendment. There was one public speaker who expressed concern with a minimum lot size of 3,312 SF. March 27, 2018 Notwithstanding staff’s and the Planning Commission’s support of Summerly’s request, but in response to questions raised after the March 6th Planning Commission meeting, Summerly has agreed to modify its request and to increase the minimum lot size to 3,500 SF. That increase in minimum lot size from 3,312 SF to 3,500 SF will result in the loss of two lots in Unit 20. The resulting minimum lot size in Unit 20 would be similar to the minimum lot size at Linden Pointe (Unit 24) which was unanimously approved by the City Council in 2016. The Unit 23 and Unit 25 neighborhoods have minimum lot sizes larger than Linden Pointe In addition to this change in lot size, Summerly has also modified its plans to accommodate several new Summerly Community Association owned neighborhood trail connections and view/overlook walks within easements in these new neighborhoods and final development phase. These trail and view/overlook amenities will be landscaped and enhanced for the use of the Summerly homeowners. Page 4 of 6 DEMONSTRATING SUMMERLY’S COMMITMENT SINCE 2010  Summerly McMillin has taken the project from a community of 9 deteriorated model homes and a closed golf course to a lovely, vibrant community now home to over 800 families.  Summerly immediately refurbished the first neighborhood park and then built a second neighborhood park at a cost of $1M.  Summerly expanded the main recreation center to create the Summer House spending an approximately additional $2M on the facilities to meet homeowner requests.  Summerly just completed the first two phases of a $12M, 24 acre regional park.  Summerly has built miles of new City streets and infrastructure that serve more than just Summerly.  Summerly has preserved and improved acres of open space and natural habitat.  Summerly brought in a new HOA management company to better serve the Summerly homeowners. Summerly has done not only what it was required to do and what it said it would do, but significantly more —which is important not only to the homeowners but to the City . Today, Summerly serves as the only catalyst for th e redevelopment of the East Lake Specific Plan area . Summerly Community Park Opening 2010 Today Page 5 of 6 THE PROPOSAL REQUESTED TMA CONSISTENT WITH EAST LAKE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT #11 The proposed Unit 20, 23 and 25 neighborhood lot sizes are consistent with the recently approved (November 2017) East Lake Specific Plan Amendment #11. REASON FOR REQUESTING TMA. The reason for our request is very simple—as in all master planned communities, and Summerly is no exception, a diversity of lot, home and architectural style is important in order to meet a healthy diversity of buyer life stages and lifestyle choices. Our request in this final phase of development will modify the current plan which has excessive lot and architectural overlap and is devoid of that diversity. In effect, we are rebalancing and improving lifestyle choices. NEWLY REVISED LOT SIZES LIKE LINDEN POINTE (UNIT 24) OR LARGER.  Two of the new neighborhoods have lot sizes larger than Linden Pointe and one is very similar.  Linden Pointe was unanimously approved by the City Council in 2016 and is Summerly’s most successful selling neighborhood. SUMMARY OF SUMMERLY’S PROPOSED FINAL DEVELOPMENT PHASE A Diverse Selection of Homes in Eight Neighborhoods:  Five neighborhoods (313 lots) have lots that are 5,000, 5,500 and 6,000 SF or larger.  All eight neighborhoods have an average lot size of 5,598 SF  Remapped lots within Units 20, 23 and 25 will average 4,371 SF, with over half of the lots over 4,000 SF.  All neighborhoods consist of conventional single-family homes with full 18 ft. driveways, two car garages as well as on-street parking on standard public streets.  All homes will continue to maintain a minimum five foot side yard lot (10 foot building separation) as is currently the case in all existing Summerly neighborhoods. Anticipated Average Home Sizes on the New Neighborhoods:  Unit 20 (Lot 23): 1,700 SF  Unit 25 (Lot 26): 1,850 SF  Unit 23 (Lot 27): 2,200 SF Sample Street Scene Linden Pointe Min Lot Size 3,525 SF High Demand: Sell as fast as they can build. Page 6 of 6 AMENITIES IN FINAL DEVELOPMENT PHASE  Sunset Park. Summerly is building a third neighborhood park that is within walking distance to the new neighborhoods and plans to open that park well in advance of home sales in the new neighborhoods. Sunset Park will include several play structures, picnic and BBQ areas and another fire pit adult meeting spot.  Trail Connection. In addition, Summerly has decided to modify its plans in this final development phase (and in the new neighborhoods) to include several homeowner association trail and view/overlook connections to enable all homeowners at Summerly to enjoy the mountain and open space views to the west.  More Homeowners with Views. By placing smaller home neighborhoods along a portion of the outer edge of Summerly, allows 50% more homes to share the majestic mountain views of that area. A more traditional plan would place larger, more expensive homes along the edge of the community to capture the views and largest view premiums possible with smaller homes in the center of the community. Why did we put this mix of homes on Summerly’s view edge? Summerly is a place of diversity with a strong and vibrant culture of inclusion. The neighborhoods ebb and flow throughout the masterplan with amenities anchoring phases. Summerly is not a city, but a true connected community where people easily walk all over. Essentially, for Summerly to share one of its best features with several diverse neighborhoods matches the resident culture of Summerly. Kids play park with picnic area, grass hill play, open turf, fire pit, outdoor “dining room” and lounger overlook.