HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Reso No 2018-61 (TTM 37319, MSHCP)RESOLUTTON NO.2018-61
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOIUMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPT FINDINGS THAT TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP NO. 37319 IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY
MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP)
Whereas, Abraham Gottlieb, Lake Elsinore Diamond Road, LLC, has filed an application with the
City of Lake Elsinore (City) requesting approval Tentative Tract Map (TTM) No. 37319 for a one-
lot subdivision of a 0.50-acre lot for condominium purposes (Prqect). The Project will allow the
conversion of a building currently under construction into a six (6)-unit commercial condominium
building. The Project is located northerly of Campbell Street, on the easterly side of Diamond
Drive, and westerly of Mission Trail, more specifically referred to as 433 Diamond Drive. (APN:
363-162-027); and,
Whereas, Section 6.0 of the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) requires that
all discretionary projects within a MSHCP Criteria Cell undergo the Lake Elsinore Acquisition
Process (LEAP) and the 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 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 the tentative map review; and,
Whereas, on August 21, 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 AND 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:
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
not located within a MSHCP Criteria Cell. Based upon the site reconnaissance survey there
are no lssues regarding consistency with the other "Plan Wide Requirements." The only
requirements potentiaily applicable to the Project were the Protection of Species Associated
with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines (Sectiorl 6.1.2 of the MSHCP) and
PC Reso. No. 2018-61
Page 2 of 3
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 within a MSHCP
Criteria Cell. Therefore, the project was not required to go through the LEAP orJPR processes
3. The Project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines.
The Project has been completely disturbed forthe development of a professional commercial
office that is cunently under construction. The proposed Tentative Map is only proposing to
conveft the O.5Gacre lot into a one (1)-condominium lot with six (6) units for financing
purposes. 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 assessrnenf norfufther
focused surveys are required for the Project. Therefore, Protection of NEPS Guidelines as
set fotth 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 cefia,n species if the Project is located in
Criteria Area Species Suruey Areas, Amphibian Species 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 ls nof within or adjacent to any MSHCP criteia or conservation areas.
Therefore, the UrbantWildlands lnteiace Guidelines of MSHCP Section 6.1.4 are not
applicable.
7. The Project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements.
The Project has been completely disturbed for the development of a professional commercial
office that is currently under construction. The proposed Tentative Map is only proposing to
conveft the O.SGacre lot into a one (1)-condominium lot with six (6) units for financing
purposes. There are no resources located on the Project site, requiing mapping as set forth
in MSHCP Section 6.3.1.
8. The Project is coisistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines.
The Project site is ,ot within or adjacent to any MSHCP citeia or conservation areas.
Therefore, the Fuels Management Guidelines of MSHCP Section 6.4 are not applicable.
PC Reso. No. 2018-61
Page 3 of 3
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.
The Project has been completely disturbed forthe development of a professional commercial
office that is currently under construction. The proposed Tentative Map is only proposing to
convefi the 0.54-acre lot into a one (1)-condominium lot with six (6) units for financing
purposes. As descibed above, the PAed complies with all application MSHCP
requirements.
Section 3: Based upon 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 21th day of August, 2018, by the following vote:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
ctTY oF LAKE ELSTNORE )
l, Justin Kirk, Assistant Community Development Director of the City of Lake Elsinore, California,
hereby certify that Resolution No. 2018-61 was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City
of Lake Elsinore, California, at a Regular meeting held of August 21, 2018, and that the same was
adopted by the following vote.
AYES: Commissioner's Gray, Armit and Klaarenbeek; and Chairman Ross
NOES: None
ABSENT: Vice-Chair Carroll
ABSTAIN: None
:
Community Development Director