HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Reso No 2019-36 (VTTM 36557, MSHCP)RESOLUTTON NO.20{9-36
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THECITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORINA, ADOPT FINDINGS THAT VESTING
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36557, REVISION NO. 1 IS CONSISTENT WITH THEWESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MUPTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION
PLAN (MSHCP)
whergl:, David salene, spectrum communities, LLC has filed an application with the city of
Lake Elsinore (City) requesting approval of Revision No. 1 to Vesting Tentative Tract Uap lWitrllNo. 36557 proposing to revise the previously approved tentative map to include a phasing plan
and to relocate the public park due to an existing 3O-inch water line. The revision ielocates thepublic park within Phase 1 (Village 3), reduces the number of lots by two (2), and allows the
tentative map to be developed in seven (7) phases. vrrM 36s57, Revision Nio. 1 will reflect a
subdivision of 1 50.8 acres into 450 single-family residential lots, one 5.1 -acre gross (4.3-acre net)
park site, seven (7) landscape lots, four (4) open space lots, one (1) sewer lift station, and three
(3) water quality and drainage basin lots that will be developed in seven (7) phases (project). The
Project is located southwesterly of lnterstate 15 on the northern side of existing Lakeshore Drive
between Dryden street and rerra cotta Road (ApNs: 378-040-004 thru oo7, 0i2,389-180-001,
002, and 389-190-002); and,
whereas, section 6.0 of the MSHCP requires that all discretionary poects 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 Map) the
Planning commission (commission) has been delegated with the responsibility of making
recommendations to the City Council (Council) pertaining to revisions to the tentative map; and,
whereas, on June 18,2019 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 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.
1 . 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. 2019-36
Page 2 ol 4
Pursuant to the city's MSHCP Resolution, the Proiect is required to be reviewed for MSHCP
consistency, inclucling consistency with other "Plan wide Requirements." The Proiect site is
not located within a USHCp Criteria Celt. As paft of the approvalofthe onginalVTTM 36557,
the project has gone through the review process to determine consistency with the MSHCP'S
requirements, tie Protection of Specles Asso ciated with Riparian/Riveine 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 Regaonal
Conservation Authority's (RCA) JPR processes.
The proposed Project is not located within an MSHCP Criteria Cell area, therefore, no formal
LEAP submittal was required as part of the approval of the original VTTM 36557. However,
the Project is stitl requiied to demonstrate compliance with "Other Plan Requirements." The
Project is in compliance as described futther below.
3. The Project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines.
No vemat pools exist on the site and therefore vemal pool species are not expected to occur.
Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP focuses on protection of ripaian/riveine areas and vernal pool
habitat types based on their value in the conseNation of a number of MSHCP-covered
species. The project wilt impact 1 .55 acres of MSHCP iparian/iverine, inclyding 1.13 acres
of riparian vegetation and 0.42 acre of unvegetated riverine areas. Pursuant to the
requirements of section 6.1.2, a Determination of Biologically Equivalyt.t .o1 -superiorProtection (DBESP) was prepared as paft of the approval of the original vTTM 36557. The
DBESP conctuded that avoidance of the impacted riparian/riverine areas is infeasible and that
through the acquisition of mitigation credits suppofting equal or superior values, the proiect
woulcl reptace lost functions and values and would be considered a biologically equivalent or
superior project.
4. The Project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species (NEPS)
Guidelines.
The proposed project site is tocated within the NEPS Survey Area (NEPSSA) as shown on
Figure 6-1 of the MSHCP. Focused ptant suNeys were conducted as part of the approval of
the originat VTTM 36557 for species identified under Section 6.1 .3 of the MSHCP in areas of
the Project site that contained potentially suitable habitat, and none of the NEPSSA target
species were identified onsite. As such, the Proiect is compliant with MSHCP Section 6.1.3.
5. The Project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures.
The MSHCP requires additional surveys for ceftain species if the Project is located in CASSA,
Amphibian Specles Survey Area with Critical Area, Bunowing Owl Survey Areas with Citeria
Area, and Mammal Species Survey Areas with Criteria Areas of the MSHCP. The Proiect site
is located outside of any CASSA for plants and mammals and no CASSA plant species were
obseNed duing the focused surveys conducted for the site as part of the approval of the
original VTTM 36557.
The proposed Project is located within the survey area identified for the bunowing owl.
Breeding season protocol surveys for the westem bunowing owl were conducted as paft of
the approval of the original VTTM 36557 pursuant to the Burrowing Owl Survey lnstructions
6.
PC Reso. No.2019-36
Page 3 of 4
as set forth by the MSHCP and resulted in negative findings of burrowing owl and sign. As
required by the MSHCP, mitigation has been included requiing pre-construction focused
species surveys within 31-days prior to any ground-disturbing activities at the project site
where suitable habitat is present and requiing appropriate mitigation if active ,esls are
located.
Based upon the above, it can be concluded that the proposed project rs consrsterf with the
provisions of the MSHCP.
The Project is consistent with the UrbanAy'Vildlands lnterface Guidelines.
The MSHCP Urban/Wildland lnterface Guidelines are intended to address indirect effects
associated with locating development in proximity to the MSHCP ConseNation Area. lndirect
impacts to the off-site potential Conservation Area are dlscussed aboye under ltem 4a, b for
the following issues: Drainage, Toxics, Lighting, Noise, lnvasive species, Barriers, and
Grading/Land Development. As required by the MSHCP, mitigation has been included as part
of approval of the oiginal VTTM 36557 that would reduce indirect impacts to a /ess-than-
significant level, and would be consistent with the MSHCP.
The Project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements.
As part of the approval of the original VTTM 36557, Vegetation mapping was conducted as
paft of the biological suNeys conducted on the enthe Project Site and rs consrstent with the
MSHCP Section 6.3.1 Vegetation Mapping requirements.
The Project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines.
The Fuels Management Guidelines presented in Section 6.4 of the MSHCP are intended to
address brush management activities around new development within or adjacent to the
MSHCP Conservation Area and shall be implemented as paft of the Project. As such, the
Project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines.
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, both written and testimonial, and the above
findings, 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 18th day of June, 2019, by the following vote:
7.
o
Ross, Chairman
PC Reso. No. 2019-36
Page 4 of 4
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE )
l, Justin Kirk, Assistant Community Development Director of the City of Lake Elsinore, California,
hereby certify that Resolution No. 2019-36 was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City
of Lake Elsinore, California, at a Regular meeting held of June 18, 2019, and that the same was
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner's Gray and
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Armit
ABSTAIN: None
Klaarenbeek; Vice-Chair Carroll and Chairman Ross
I