The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2021-115 PA 2020-109 Compliance with MSHCPRESOLUTION NO. 2021-115 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING FINDINGS THAT PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 2020-109 (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2021-03, COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2021-06 and TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 38004) IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP) Whereas, Angie Allen of Steeno Designs, has filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore (City) requesting approval of Planning Application No. 2020-109 (Conditional Use Permit No. 2021-03, Commercial Design Review No. 2021-06 and Tentative Parcel Map No. 38004). The Project consists of Tentative Parcel Map 38004 that would subdivide an existing 1.09-acre site into two (2) lots, a Commercial Design Review application for the purposes of the construction of an 893 square foot new Starbucks restaurant and a Conditional Use Permit to permit a drive through restaurant. The project is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Riverside and Lakeshore and is more specifically referred to as Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 379-224- 015; and, Whereas, the Project site is within the MSHCP Elsinore Area Plan, Subunit 3 (Elsinore). The proposed project site does not lie within any Criteria Cells; and, Whereas, pursuant to Section 17.415.070 (Conditional Use Permit), Section 17.415.050 (Major Design Review) and Chapter 16.24 (Tentative Map) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), the Planning Commission (Commission) has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council (Council) pertaining to conditional use permits, design reviews and tentative parcel maps; and, Whereas, on August 3, 2021, at a duly noticed Public Hearing the Commission considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item and took unanimous action to recommend approval to the Council; and Whereas, pursuant to Section 17.415.070 (Conditional Use Permit), Section 17.415.050 (Major Design Review) and Chapter 16.24 (Tentative Map) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), the Council has the responsibility of making decisions to approve, modify or disapprove recommendations of the Commission pertaining to conditional use permits, design reviews and tentative parcel maps; and, Whereas, on September 28, 2021, at a duly noticed Public Hearing, the Council has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: The Council has considered the project and its consistency with the MSHCP prior to adopting Findings of Consistency with the MSHCP. Section 2: That in accordance with the MSHCP, the Council makes the following findings for MSHCP consistency: DocuSign Envelope ID: C35DC878-9F47-4107-99C1-2A3141A35131 CC Reso. No. 2021-115 Page 2 of 5 1. The Project is a project under the City’s MSHCP Resolution, and the City must make an MSHCP Consistency finding before approval. The Property is not located within an MSHCP criteria cell. Pursuant to the City’s MSHCP Resolution, the Project has been reviewed for MSHCP consistency, including consistency with “Other Plan Requirements.” These include the Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines (MSHCP, § 6.1.2), Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines (MSHCP, § 6.1.3), Additional Survey Needs and Procedures (MSHCP, § 6.3.2), Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines (MSHCP, § 6.1.4), Vegetation Mapping (MSHCP, § 6.3.1) requirements, Fuels Management Guidelines (MSHCP, § 6.4), and payment of the MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee (MSHCP Ordinance, § 4). 2. The Project is not subject to the City’s LEAP and the County’s Joint Project Review (JPR) processes. The project site (1.09 acres) is not located within any MSHCP Criteria Cells. The Project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines. The property was assessed for the presence of Riparian/Riverine and Vernal Pool habitats through an on-site evaluation. No rivers, streams, or other watercourses (or vegetation associated with these features) were observed on the project site. The closest riparian vegetation is located in a flood-control channel approximately ¼ mile west (Temescal Wash) of the Project site. No drainages, waterbodies, or other water resources under the regulatory authority of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) were observed in the project area. No basins, ponds, or obvious depressional features were observed on the Project site. The site is vacant except for one small single-family residence that will be demolished. There are no trees, plants or shrubs onsite, only scattered weeds. 3. The Project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines. The property is not in a Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Area (NEPSSA) for any narrow endemic species, and no NEPSSA surveys are required. The proposed Project is therefore consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines. 4. The Project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures. The MSHCP requires additional surveys for certain species if the project is located in certain locations. There are no additional survey needs and procedures for the project site pursuant to MSHCP Figure 6-2 (Criteria Area Species Survey Area), Figure 6-3 (Amphibian Species Survey Areas with Criteria Area), Figure 6-4 (Burrowing Owl Survey Areas with Criteria Area), Figure 6-5 (Mammal Species Survey Areas With Criteria Area), burrowing owl surveys and surveys for Criteria Area species. Therefore, for MSHCP consistency, additional focused rare plant surveys for these species are required. The property is not within a Criteria Area Species Survey Area (CASSA), and CASSA surveys are not required. It is also not within survey areas for amphibian species (MSHCP DocuSign Envelope ID: C35DC878-9F47-4107-99C1-2A3141A35131 CC Reso. No. 2021-115 Page 3 of 5 Figure 6-3) burrowing owls (Figure 6-4) or mammal species (MSHCP Figure 6-5) and surveys for those species are not required. Therefore, the subject project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures of the MSHCP. 5. The Project is consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines. Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP sets forth guidelines that are intended to address indirect effects associated with locating development in proximity to the MSHCP Conservation Area, where applicable. The Project site is not immediately adjacent to a defined MSHCP Conservation Area and thus does not pose a risk of causing direct or indirect effects to any defined MSHCP Conservation Areas. The closest riparian vegetation is located in a flood-control channel approximately ¼ mile to the west of the project site. Indirect impacts, often called “edge effects”, are those that affect the quality of nearby wildlife habitat resulting from disturbance by construction (such as noise, dust, and urban pollutants) and/or the long-term use of the site. There are no criteria cells in the vicinity. The Project will not impact Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines in Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP: 1. The Project will not result in runoff being discharged into any MSHCP conservation area. The Project is designed as to not release toxins, chemicals, petroleum products, exotic plant materials, or other elements that might degrade or harm biological resources or ecosystem processed within a MSHCP Conservation Area. Drainage flows will be captured by ribbon gutters and directed towards proposed storm water BMPs. 2. Land use is not proposed in proximity to the MSHCP Conservation Any use where chemicals generate bio-products such as oil machinery and trucks that are potentially toxic or may adversely affect wildlife species, habitat, or water quality shall incorporate measures to ensure that application of such chemicals does not result in discharge to a MSHCP Conservation Area. Measures implemented to address drainage issues would also address chemicals and toxins. 3. All exterior lighting will be directed downward and shielded away from the natural lands and adjacent properties. 4. Noise generation activities are anticipated to result from operation of the Project. Any noise producing activities associated with the long-term operation of the businesses will be relegated to indoor space levels and shall not exceed residential noise standards. 5. No invasive and/or non-native plant species on the California Invasive Plant Counsel List will be used in the landscaping of the Project site. For these reasons, the subject Project is consistent with the Urban/Wildlife Interface Guidelines. DocuSign Envelope ID: C35DC878-9F47-4107-99C1-2A3141A35131 CC Reso. No. 2021-115 Page 4 of 5 6. The Project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements. The project site is within developed area of the City and there are no special status plant and wildlife species known to occur within the Project vicinity. 7. The Project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines. The MSHCP acknowledges that brush management to reduce fuel loads and protect urban uses and public health/safety shall occur where development is adjacent to conservation areas. Surrounding land uses include streets, an alley, low density residential and commercial. The Project site is not immediately adjacent to a MSHCP Conservancy Area and thus does not pose a risk of causing direct or indirect effects to MSHCP Conservancy Areas. Therefore, the Project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.4 of the MSHCP. 8. The proposed project will be conditioned to pay the City’s MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee. The Project has been conditioned to pay MSHCP Local Development Mitigation fees in effect at the time of payment. 9. The proposed Project is consistent with the MSHCP. Based upon the above discussed MSHP requirements, the proposed project is consistent with the MSHCP. Section 3: Based upon the evidence presented, both written and testimonial, and the above findings, the Council hereby finds that the Project is consistent with the MSHCP. Section 4: This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. Section 5: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original Resolutions. Passed and Adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, this 28th day of September 2021. Robert E. Magee Mayor Attest: Candice Alvarez, MMC City Clerk DocuSign Envelope ID: C35DC878-9F47-4107-99C1-2A3141A35131 CC Reso. No. 2021-115 Page 5 of 5 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ) I, Candice Alvarez, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 2021-115 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, at the Regular meeting of September 28, 2021 and that the same was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Tisdale, Johnson, and Manos; Mayor Pro Tem Sheridan; and Mayor Magee NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Candice Alvarez, MMC City Clerk DocuSign Envelope ID: C35DC878-9F47-4107-99C1-2A3141A35131