HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Reso No 2017-79 (Nova Homes, MSHCP)RESOLUTION NO. 2017.79
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" AOOPT FINDINGS THAT TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP NO. 37381 IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY
MULTTPLE SPECTES HABTTAT GONSERVATTON PLAN (MSHCP)
Whereas, Nova Homes, lnc. has filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore (City)
requesting approval of Tentative Tract Map (TTM) No. 37381 for a subdivision of 19.54 acres into
73 single-family residential lots (ranging in size from 6,354 sq. ft. to 35,284 sq. ft.) and five (5)
lettered lots for open space and a water quality/detention basin (Project). The Project is located
southeasterly of Highway 74, westerly of Rosetta Canyon Drive, on the northern side of Third
Street within the Ramsgate Specific PIan. (APNs: 347-330-001, 002, 065, 347-330-067 through
073); 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 POect 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 tentative maps; and,
Whereas, on October 17, 2017 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 Pro1ect 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 C teria Cell. The Ramsgate Specific Plan,
Revlsion No. 6 (RSP#6) has gone through the review process to determine consistency
with the MSHCP's requirements, the Protection of Specles Associated with
Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines (Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP), and
PC Reso. No.2017-79
Page 2 of 4
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) JPR processes.
The Project is located within the MSHCP Elsinore Area Plan but is not located in a Criteria
Cell Core or Linkage. Therefore, Project was required to be processed through the City's
LEAP and JPR processes.
3. The P@ect is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines.
The disturbed wetland onsite is considered riparianhiverine although none of the
riparian/riverine covered species have any potentialto occur onsite. Seasonal ponds occur
onsife, sorne of which possess indicators of all three wetland parameters (sol/g
vegetation, and hydrology). Wet season surveys for sensitive fairy shrimp were negative.
A Determination of Biologicaily Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP) analysis
repoft was prepared to address impacts to disturbed wetland which describes why
avoidance of seasonal disturbed wetland is not feasible or preferable quantifies
unavoidable impacts describes features and measures to reduce indirect effects and
makes findings that demonstrate that the Project would be biologically equivalent or
superior to an avoidance alternative.
Because the disturbed wetland onsite is of low quality preservation of the disturbed
wetland is not considered feasible or desirable ln order to avoid the disturbed wetland
onsite a minimum often percent (10%) ot the housing units would need to be eliminated.
The resulting preservation would leave small isolated disturbed wetland areas sunounded
by housing development that drain into existing residential development areas The
alternative is not considered feasible because a viable reserve cannot be reasonably
implemented at this location and superior mitigation options are available offsite that would
provide for better long -term conseruation of the resources being impacted onsite.
Mitigation for impacts would include acquisition of 0.54 acre for restoration on propefty
known as the Cloverleaf in the southern end of Lake Elsinore or other offsite mitigation
parcels acceptable to the City and resource agencies. The riparian habitat restored within
the Cloverleaf site will be of a much higher quality than the disturbed wetland habitat being
impacted and will contribute to long -term MSHCP conservation goals The offsite
acquisition meets the definition of a Biologically Equivalent Preservation Alternative
consistent with Section 6.1.2.
4. The Project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species (NEPS)
Guidelines.
The Project site is not located within the NEPS Survey Areas as shown on Figure d1 of
the MSHCP. The Project is consistent with the Protection of NEPS Guidelines as set forth
in Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP.
5. The propose Project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures.
The Property is outside of any Criteria Area Specles Survey Area for plants, amphibians,
PC Reso. No.2017-79
Page 3 of 4
and mammals. No Criteria Area Specles Survey Area plant species were observed during
slte surveys. The Property occurs within the bunowing owl survey area. No owls were
observed during surveys onsite. Therefore, the Ramsgate Applications are consistent with
MSHCP Section 6.3.2.
6. The Project is consistent with the UrbanlVVildlands lnterface Guidelines.
Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP sets forTh guidelines which are intended to address indirect
effecfs assoc,ate d 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 Property is not located adjacent to conserved land
or other applicable open space. Therefore, an assessmert of indirect impacts assoclated
with the Urban /Wildlands lnterface is not required.
7. The Project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements.
The Ramsgate Specific Plan, Revision No. 6 (RSP#6) was subject to the Protection of
Specles Assocrafed with Riparian /Riverine and Vernal Pool policies. Any related
resources were mapped as part of the Determination of Biological Equivalent or Superior
Preservation submittal. The Project is consistent with MSHCP Section 6.3.1.
8. The Project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines.
The Project is conditioned to provide a buffer to the open space area that will function as
a Fuel Modification Zone. Therefore, the Project is consistent with the Fuels Management
Guidelines of MSHCP Section 6.4.
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 Poect is consistent with the MSHCP.
Section 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 17m day of October, 2017, by the following vote.
I
PC Reso. No.2017-79
Page 4 of 4
STATE OF CALTFORNTA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
clry oF LAKE ELSTNORE )
I, Justin Kirk, Principal Planner of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, hereby certify that
Resolution No. 2017-79 was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore,
California, at a Regular meeting held of October 17,20'17, and that the same was adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Commissioner's Armit, Carroll and Klaarenbeek; Vice-Chair Ross and Chairman GrayNOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Justin