Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Reso No 2016-21 (RDR 2015-03, MSHCP)RESOLUTION NO. 2016-21 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ADOPT FINDINGS THAT RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO, 2015.03 IS GONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP) WHEREAS, Stanley Lau, Plenty of Gold, LLC requests approval of the construction of a 6,839 Square Foot, Eight (8) Unit Apartment Complex, laundry facility, trash enclosure and related improvements. The proposed project is specifically located at Located at 125 Heald Ave (APN: 373-025-008) generally located at the northeast corner of Heald Ave and Ellis; 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 of Lake Elsinore adopt consistency findings demonstrating that the proposed discretionary entitlement complies with the MSCHP cell criteria, and the MSCHP goals and oblectives, and WHEREAS, pursuant to Lake Elsinore Municrpal Code (LEMC) Chapter 17.184 (Design Review) the Planning Commission has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council pertaining to the residential design review; and WHEREAS, on March 15, 2016, 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 DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the Project and its consistency with the MSHCP prior to recommending that the City Council adopt Findings of Consistency with the MSHCP. SECTION 2. That in accordance with the MSHCP, the Planning Commission 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 is required to be PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2016.21 PAGE 2 OF 4 2 reviewed for MSHCP consistency, including consistency with other "Plan Wide Requirements." The Project site /res ls nof located within a MSHCP Criteria Cell. Based upon the site reconnalssance survey there are no lssues regarding consistency with the MSCHP's other "Plan Wide Requirements." The only requirements potentially applicable to the Project were the Protection of Specles Assoclafed 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). The Project site has is located in a developed area, and has no habitat present on site, including riparian/riverine areas or vernal pools. The Project is subject to the City's LEAP and the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority's (RCA) Joint Project Review processes. As stated above, the Project is not located within a Criteria Cell and therefore the Project was not processed through the City's LEAP and a Joint Project Review. The Project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines. The site reconnaissance suNey revealed that no riparian, riverine. vernal pool/fairy shrimp habitat or other aquatic resources exist on the site. As such, the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines as set forlh in Secllon 6.1 .2 of the MSHCP are not applicable. The Project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines. The site does notfall within any Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Areas. Neither a hablfat assessment nor f urther focused surveys are required for the Project. Therefore, Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP are not applicable to the Project. The Project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures. The MSHCP only requires additional surveys for certain species if the Project is located in Criteria Area Specles Survey Areas, Amphibian Species Survey Areas, Burrowing Owl Survey Areas, and Mammal Specles Survey Areas of the MSHCP. The Prolect site is not located within any of the Critical Species Survey Areas. Therefore, the provisions of MSCHP Seclion 6.3.2 are not applicable. The Project is consistent with the UrbantWildlands lnterface Guidelines 4. 5 6. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2016-21 PAGE 3 OF 4 The Project siie ls nof within or adjacent to any MSHCP criteria or conservation areas. Therefore, the UrbantVVildlands lnterface Guidelines of MSHCP Secllon 6.1 .4 are not applicable. 7. The Pro.ject is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements. There are no resources located on the Project site requiring mapping as set forth in MSCHP Section 6.3.1. B. The Project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines. The Project sile rs nol within or adjacent to any MSHCP criteria or conservation areas. Therefore, the Fuels Management Guidelines of MSHCP Seclion 6.4 are not applicable. 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 all of the evidence presented, the above findings, and the conditions of approval imposed upon the Project, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council find 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 this '15th day of February 2016, by the following vote: City of Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Shelly J orda{Et1a irman PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2016.21 PAGE 4 OF 4 ATTEST: STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE l, Justin Kirk, Principal Planner of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, hereby certify that Resolution No. 2016-21 as adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore at a regular meeting held on the 15th day of March 2016 and that the same was adopted by the following vote: AYES: CHAIRMAN JORDAN, COMMISSIONER GRAY, COMMTSSTONER RAy NOES: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE ABSENT: VICE CHAIR ARMIT ).' Principa{ Planner J ustin