HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Reso No 2018-02 (PA 2016-58, TTM 37280, RDR 2017-01, MSHCP)RESOLUTION NO.20{8.02
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPT FINDINGS THAT PLANNING
APPLTCATTON NO. 2016-58 (TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 37280 AND RESIDENTIAL
DESTGN REVTEW NO. 20r7-0{) rS CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE
COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP)
Whereas, Peng Jiang, ANG Designs has filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore (City)
requesting approval of Planning Application No.2016-58 (Tentative Tract Map No. 37280 and
Residential Design Review No. 2017-01 ) for the development of the Lakeview Manor
Condominium project (Project). The Project consists of eleven, two-story condominium buildings
with 104 units (164,347 sq. ft. total), 242 coveted and open parking, landscaped common areas,
and a 15,909 sq. ft. outdoor recreation complex that includes a large playground, swimming pool
and spa, tennis court, and a 6,918 sq. ft. private community clubhouse on an approximately 7.5-
acre site. The Project also includes a tentative tract map application to consolidate existing
parcels into one-7 .28 acre lot for condominium purposes. The remaining 0.22-acre of the site will
be dedicated for road right-of-way purposes. The Project site is located on a currently vacant site
southeasterly of Machado Street, on the southwesterly side ofthe intersection of Lakeshore Drive
and Gunnerson Street within the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan (LVSP) (APN: 379-230-00'1);
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,
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 Chapter 16.24 (Tentative Map) and Chapter 17.184 (Design Review) of
the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), the Planning Commission (Commission) has been
delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council (Council)
pertaining to tentative maps and design reviews; and,
Whereas, on December 5, 20'17 and January 16, 2018 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.
NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE ANO ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section l: The Commission has considered the Project and its consistency with the MSHCP
prior to recommending that the Council adopt Findings of Consistency with the MSHCP.
Section 2: That in accordance with the MSHCP, the Commission makes the following findings
for MSHCP consistency:
PC Reso. No. 2018-02
Page 2 of 4
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 reviewed for MSHCP
consistency, including consistency with other "Plan Wide Requirements." The project site is
located not within a MSHCP Citeia Cell. A MSHCP Consistency Analysis/Habitat
Assessment Reportwas conducted and prepared on July 6, 2017 for the project by ARCHON
Consulting Co. to determine consistency with the MSHCP's requirements, the Protection of
Specrbs Assoaated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidetines (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 Criteia
Cell Core or Linkage. Therefore, Project was not required to be processed through the LEAp
and JPR processes.
3. The Project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines.
Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP requires that projects develop avoidance altematives, if feasibte,
that would allow for full or paftial avoidance of ripaian/riverine areas. Per MSHCP Section
6.1.2, no ipaian/riverine orvemal pool habitat has been identified on the PAed site pursuant
to ARCHON Consulting's assessment Additionally, no direct impacts will occur to habitat for
MSHCP-Covered riparian bird species of concern, least Bell's vireo, southwestern willow
flycatcher, and western yellowbilled cuckoo, because no suitable habitat exists on site for
these specrbs. There are also no vernal pools, stock ponds, or similar closed depressions with
habitat and soils suitable for sensitive fairy shrimp specles. Thus, the proposed Project is
consistent with polices set fofth in MSHCP Section 6.1.2 2.
4. The Project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species (NEpS)
Guidelines.
The Project slte,.s not located within the MSHCP NEPS Survey Area (NEPSSA); therefore,
this section of the MSHCP does not apply to the Project. Thus, the project does not conflict
with the policies set fotth in MSHCP Section 6.1.3.
5. The proposed Project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures.
The PAed sfte rs nof located within the MSHCP-designated survey area for plants,
amphibians, or mammals. The project site is not located in an MSHCP species survey area
for the westem bunowing owl. Additionally, suitable habitat areas were not present due to the
extent of development, land disturbance, and stand of tall mature trees. No evidence of
burrowing owl bunows or sign was observed on the Project site. Thus, no focused surveys for
bunowing owl are required. The Project is required to conduct a preconstruction surveys for
nesting birds will fufther ensure consistency with MSHCP Section 6.3.2.
6. The Project is consistent with the UrbanMildlands lnterface Guidelines.
PC Reso. No. 2018-02
Page 3 of 4
Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP sefs forth guidelines which are intended to address indirect
effecIs assoc,ared 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 proposed Project is not located within or adjacent to wildland
conservation land per MSHCP Section 6.1 .4. Thus, the project will not conflict with the policies
set fotth in MSHCP Section 6.1 .4.
7. The Project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements.
Vegetation mapping was conducted as paft of the biological surveys conducted on the entire
Project Site and is consiste nt with the MSHCP Section 6.13.Vegetation Mapping
requirements.
8. The Project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines.
MSHCP Section 6.4 required fuel management where development is proposed adjacent to
MSHCP Conservation area. The proposed Project is considered infill development and is not
located adjacent to any MSHCP Conseruation areas. Thus, no further action related to fuels
management is required.
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 Commission hereby recommends that the Council find
that the Project is consistent with the MSHCP.
Section 4: This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
Passed and Adopted on this 16th day of January, 2018, by the following vote:
f-
PC Reso. No. 20'18-02
Page 4 of 4
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. 2018-02 was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore,
California, at a Regular meeting held of January 16,2018, and that the same was adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Commissioner's Carroll, and Klaarenbeek; Vice-Chair Ross and Chairman Gray
NOES: None
ABSENT: CommissionerArmit
ABSTAIN: None
)
) ss.
)