The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPC Reso No 2018-57 (TPM, CDR, MSHCP)RESOLUTTON NO.2018-57 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COi,IMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ADOPT F]NDINGS THAT PLANNING APPLICATION 2OI7- 74 (COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2018-02; TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 37534; CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-18) lS CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (irlSHCP) Whereas, Tally CM has submitted an application for several entitlements which include a Tentative Tract Map for the consolidation of three (3) lots into one ("1) lots and the reconfiguration of the adjacent right of way, a Conditional Use Permit to permit the operation of a vehicle sales and repair facility and a Commercial Design Review application for development ot a 53,425 square foot of building.. The Project site is located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Collier and Crane Avenues in Lake Elsinore, California and is comprised of three parcels, totaling approximately 6.97 acres in size, and known as Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) 377-080-053, 377 -080-057, and 377-080-079; and, Whereas, Section 6.0 of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) requires that all p@ecls which are proposed on land covered by an MSHCP criteria cell and whach require discretionary approval by the legislative body undergo the Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process (LEAP) and a Joint Project Review (JPR) between the City and the Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) prior to public review of the Project applications; and, Whereas, Section 6.0 further requires that discretionary development projects be analyzed pursuant to the MSHCP "Plan Wide Requirements" even if not within an MSHCP criteria cell; and, Whereas, the Project is discretionary in nature and requires review and approval by the Planning Commission (Commission) and City Council (Council); and, Whereas, the Project is not located within a MSHCP Criteria Cell and is within the Elsinore Plan Area of the MSHCP, and therefore, the Project was reviewed pursuant to the MSHCP "Plan Wide Requirements"; and, Whereas, Section 6.0 of the MSHCP requires that the City adopt consistency findings prior to approving any discretionary project entitlements for development of property that is subject to the MSHCP; and, Whereas, on August 7,2018, 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, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: The Commission has reviewed and analyzed the proposed applications and their consistency with the MSHCP prior to making a decision to recommend that the Council adopt Findings of Consistency with the MSHCP for the Project. PC Reso. No. 2018-57 Page 2 of 4 Section 2: That in accordance with the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), and the MSHCP, Findings for adoption have been made as follows: '1. The proposed project is a project underthe City's MSHCP Resolution, and the City must make an MSHCP Consistency Finding before approval. Pursuant to the City's MSHCP lmplementing Resolution, pior to approving any discretionary entitlement, the City is required to review the Project to ensure conslste ncy with the MSHCP criteia and other "Plan Wide Requirements." The Project, as proposed, was found to be consistent with the MSHCP criteia. ln addition, the Project was reviewed and found consistent with the following "Plan Wide Requirements". Protection of Specres Associated with Ripaian/Riverine Areas and Vemal Pool Guidelines (MSHCP g 6.2), l.Protection of Narrow Endemic Species MSHCP g 6.3), l.UrbanAtl/ildlands lnteiace Guidelines (MSHCP S 6.4), l.Vegetation Mapping (MSHCP S 6.1), 3.Additional Survey Needs and Procedures (MSHCP S 6.2), 3 Fuels Management (MSHCP $ 6.4), and payment of the MSHCP Locat Devetopment Mitigation Fee (MSHCP Ordinance $ 4.0). 2. The proposed project is subject to the City's LEAP (Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process) and the County's Joint POect Review (JPR) processes. The proposed project is not located within an MSHCP Citeria Cell area, therefore, no formal LEAP submittalwas required. However, the project is still required to demonstrate compliance with "Other Plan Requirements." The project is in compliance as described further betow. 3. The proposed project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines. Section 6.21 .of the MSHCP focuses on protection of ipaian/riveine areas and vernat pool habitat types based upon their value in the conservation of a number of MSHCP covered specles. No riparian/iveine areas are located within the project site and there are no potentiat vernal pools within the project site, therefore, the Project is conslstent wlth Se ction 6.21 .of the MSHCP. 4. The proposed p@ect is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species (NEPS) Guidelines. The project site is not within the MSHCP NEPS or Citeria Area Species (CAS) survey areas. There were no rare plants found within the project area and there is no suitable habitat for rare plants. Thus, the project is consistent with the NEPS requirements of the MSHCP. 5. The proposed pro.iect is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures. The proposed project is not within any MSHCP Criteria Area Species Suruey Area (CASSA) for plant or animal specrbs. 6. The proposed project is consistent with the UrbanMildlands lnterface Guidelines. Section 6.41 .of the MSHCP sers fo,th guidelines which are intended to address indirect effects assoclafed with locating development in proximity to the MSHCP Conservation Area, where applicable. Future Development in proximity to the MSHCP Conservation Area may result in _l PC Reso. No. 2018-57 Page 3 of 4 Edge Effects that will adversely affect biological resources within the MSHCP Conservation Area. To minimize such Edge Effects, guidelines sha// be implemented in conjunction with review of individual public and private Development projects in proximity to the MSHCP Conservation Area. Cunently, the proposed project is not located adjacent to land dedicated to the MSHCP Reserye. 7. The proposed project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements. Vegetation mapping was conducted as part of the biological surveys conducted on the entire Project Site and rs consrste nt with the MSHCP Section 6.13.Vegetation Mapping requirements. 8. The proposed 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 not be affected by fuels management requirements either on site or on adjacent undeveloped land. 9. The proposed poect is 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 huilding pemits. 10. The Project is consistent with the reserve assembly requirements of the MSHCP. The MSHCP provides for the assembly of a ConseNation Area consisting of Core Areas and Linkages for the conseruation of covered specrbs. The subject project is not located in a Criteria Ceil, ex,st /rg Reserve Area, or in Public/Quasi-Public habitat conservation land. 11. The proposed project overall is consistent with the MSHCP. The Project is conslslent with all applicable provisions of the MSHCP. No fufther actions related to the MSHCP are required. Section 3: Based upon the evidence presented and the above findings, the Commission hereby recommends that the Council of the City adopt findings that the Projecl is consistent with the MSHCP. Section + This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. Passed and Adopted on this 7th day of August 2018, by the following vote: r PC Reso. No. 2018-57 Page 4 ol 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. 2018-57 as adopted by the Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore at a Regular meeting held of August 7, 2018, and that the same was adopted by the following vote: AYES. Commissioner's Gray, Armit and Klaarenbeek; Vice-Chair Carroll and Chairman Ross NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None