Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Reso No 2018-05 (PA 2017-53, CUP 2017-17, CDR 2017-12, MSHCP) JACK IN THE BOXRESOLUTION NO.2018.05 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOi'IMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPT FINDINGS THAT PLANNING APPLTCATTON NO. 2017-53 (COND|T|ONAL USE PERMTT NO. 2017-17 AND coMMER|CAL DESTGN REVTEW NO. 2017-121rS CONSTSTENT W|TH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (rvrsHcP) Whereas, David Beshay, Beshay Foods, lnc. has filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore (City) requesting approval of Planning Application No. 2017-53 (Conditional Use Permit No.2017-17 and Commercial Design Review No, 2017-12) for the design and construction of a 1,865 S.F. fast food restaurant (Jack in the Box) with a drive{hru lane and related site improvements (Project). The Project is located at the southwesterly corner of the intersection of Diamond Drive and Lakeshore Drive (APN: 363-150-001, 002, 004 and 025); and, Whereas, Section 6.0 of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (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 Chapter '1 7.184 (Design Review) of the LEMC, the Planning Commission (Commission) has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council (Council) pertaining to design reviews; and, Whereas, pursuant to Chapter 1 7.168 (Conditional Use Permits) of the LEMC, the Commission has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the Council pertaining to conditional use permits; and, Whereas, on 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 COIYIMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, OETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: 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: 'l . The Project is a project under the City's MSHCP Resolution, and the City must make an MSHCP Consistency finding before approval. PC Reso. No.2018-05 Page 2 of 3 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 not located within a MSHCP Citeria Cell. Based upon the site reconnaissance survey there are no rssues regarding consistency with the MSCHP's other "Plan Wide Requirements." The only requirement potentially applicable to the Project were the Protection of Species Assocrated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vemal 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 P@ect is subject to the City's LEAP and the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority's (RCA) JPR 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 JPR processes. 3. The Project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines. The Project is proposing to develop a drivelhrough restaurant on a previously disturbed site. As such, the Riparian/Riveine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines as set fotth in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP are not applicable. 4. The Project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species (NEPS) Guidelines. The site does not fallwithin any NEPS Survey Areas. Neither a habitat assessment norfufther focused suveys are required for the Project. Therefore, Protection of NEPS Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.1 .3 of the MSHCP are not applicable to the Project. 5. 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 Specres Survey A reas, Amphibian Specles Survey Areas, Bunowing Owl Survey Areas, and Mammal Species Survey Areas of the MSHCP. The Project site is not located within any of the Critical Species Survey Areas. Therefore, the provisions of MSHCP Section 6.3.2 are not applicable. 6. The Project is consistent with the UrbanMildlands lnterface Guidelines. The Project site rs not within or adjacent to any MSHCP criteria or conseNation areas. Therefore, the Urban/Wildlands lnterface Guidelines of MSHCP Section 6.1.4 are not applicable. 7. The Project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements. The Project is proposing to develop a drive-through restaurant on a previously disturbed site. There are no resources located on the Project site, requhing mapping as set forth in MSHCP Section 6.3.1 . 8. The Project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines. The Project site ls rto, within or adjacent to any MSHCP criteria or conservation areas. PC Reso. No. 2018-05 Page 3 of 3 Therefore, the Fuels Management Guidelines of MSHCp section 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 buitding permits. 10. The Project is consistent with the MSHCP. The proiect cons,sts of adding a drive-through restaurant on a previousty disturbed slfe. As described above, the project complies with all application MSHCp requirements. $ection 3: Based upon all ofthe 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 'l6th day of January, 2018,by the following vote: STATE OF CALTFORNTA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss. ctTY oF LAKE ELSTNORE ) l, Justin Kirk, Principal Planner of the city of Lake Elsinore, california, hereby certify that Resolution No. 20'18-05 was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore, california, at a Regular meeting held of January 16, 2ola, and that the same was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner's Carroll, and Klaarenbeek; Vice-Chair Ross and Chairman GrayNOES: None ABSENT: CommissionerArmit ABSTAIN: None Justin