HomeMy WebLinkAbout0002_04_PA 2021-11 - Exhibit B - MSHCP ResolutionRESOLUTION NO. 2022-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF FINDINGS THAT
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 2021-11 (ZONE CHANGE NO. 2021-04,
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 38116, AND RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO.
2021-02) IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE
SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP)
Whereas, Shelly Jordan, Tri Pointe Homes has filed an application with the City of Lake
Elsinore (City) requesting approval of Planning Application No. 2021-11 (Zone Change No. 2021-
04, Tentative Tract Map No. 38116, and Residential Design Review No. 2021-02). Zone Change
(ZC) No. 2021-04 proposes to establish a Planned Development Unit (PUD) overlay district for
portion of the subject property that is currently zoned High Density Residential (R-3). The PUD
overlay provides modified development regulations and standards for the underlying R-3 zone to
allow for flexibility in order to allow for greater flexibility and compatibility with the General Plan.
Tentative Tract Map (TTM) No. 38116 proposes to subdivide the 34.81-acre site into nine (9) lots.
One (1) 10.94-acre lot for detached 140 condominium residences, one (1) 15.65 reserved open
space lot, one (1) 1.39-acre water quality basin, two (2) recreation lots (0.77 acres), private streets
(4.60 acres), and four (4) open space landscaping lots (0.65 acres). Residential Design Review
(RDR) No. 2021-02 proposes the design and construction of a gated condominium community
with 140 detached two-story condominium units, preliminary plotting, conceptual wall and fence
plan, recreation areas, and related amenities and infrastructure on the western portion of the site.
The project proposes three (3) different detached condominium plans ranging in size from 1,793
sq. ft. to 2,288 sq. ft. The eastern 15.65 acres of the site that is adjacent to the lake would be
preserved as natural open space. The project is located along State Route 74 (SR-74) east of the
intersection of Riverside Drive and Grand Avenue (APNs 379-060-005, 022 and 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) Section 17.415.040 (Zoning
Amendments), Section 17.415.050 (Major Design Review), Chapter 16.24 (Tentative Map),
Section 17.410.070 (Approving Authority), and Section 17.410.030 (Multiple Applications) the
Planning Commission (Commission) has been delegated with the responsibility of making
recommendations to the City Council (Council) pertaining to tentative maps and design review
applications; and,
Whereas, on January 18, 2022, 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:
PC Reso. No. 2022-____
Page 2 of 5
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.
The project site is not located within a MSHCP Criteria Cell. Pursuant to the City’s MSHCP
Resolution, the project is required to be reviewed for MSHCP consistency, including
consistency with other “Plan Wide 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 subject to the City’s LEAP and the Western Riverside County Regional
Conservation Authority’s (RCA) Joint Project Review (JPR) processes.
As stated above, the project is not located within a Criteria Cell and therefore was not required
to go through the LEAP and JPR processes.
3. The Project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines.
Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP describes the process to protect species associated with
riparian/riverine areas and vernal pools. As defined in the MSHCP, riparian/riverine areas are
lands which contain habitat dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergents, or emergent
mosses and lichens, which occur close to or depend on a nearby freshwater source or areas
that contain a freshwater flow during all or a portion of the year. These areas may support one
or more species listed in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP.
Vernal pools are seasonal wetlands that occur in depressions, typically have wetland
indicators that represent all three parameters (soils, vegetation, and hydrology), and are
defined based on vernal pool indicator plant species during the wetter portion of the growing
season but normally lack wetland indicators associated with vegetation and/or hydrology
during the drier portion of the growing season.
The Biological Technical Report, prepared by Glenn Lukos Associates, Inc. dated October 27,
2021, describes that implementation of the project would result in a permanent impact to 0.01-
acre and approximately ten linear feet of MSHCP riverine streambed along a concrete portion
of the Hill Street Channel from construction of two outlet structures into the cement lined
drainage channel. Mitigation Measure BIO-3 has been included to require purchase of 0.01
acre of re-establishment mitigation credits at an accredited mitigation bank located within the
Santa Ana River watershed. As the project is avoiding all but 0.01 acre of MSHCP riverine
resources (greater than 99 percent avoidance) and all riparian resources, with implementation
PC Reso. No. 2022-____
Page 3 of 5
of Mitigation Measure BIO-3, the project would be consistent with MSHCP Volume I, Section
6.1.2 regarding riparian/riverine areas.
The Biological Technical Report details that the project would not impact habitat with the
potential to support riparian birds or other species requiring additional surveys and procedures
under MSHCP Volume I, Section 6.1.2; however, due to the proximity of the project footprint
to riparian habitat associated with Lake Elsinore, Mitigation Measure BIO-1 has been included
to provide protection for least Bell’s vireo. With implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1,
the proposed project would be consistent with MSHCP Volume I, Section 6.1.2 for
riparian/riverine-associated species.
The project site does not contain, and therefore will not impact, any MSHCP vernal pools. As
such, the project is consistent with MSHCP Volume I, Section 6.1.2 as it pertains to vernal
pools.
4. The Project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines.
The project site is not located within the Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Areas as
shown on Figure 6-1 of the MSHCP. The project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow
Endemic Plant Species Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP.
5. 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. 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 are required for the subject property prior to approval of a development
proposal.
The property is not within a Criteria Area Species Survey Area (CASSA), and CASSA surveys
are not required. The property is not located within survey areas for amphibian species
(MSHCP Figure 6-3), or mammal species (MSHCP Figure 6-5) and surveys for those species
are not required.
Although surveys completed for the Biological Technical Report did not identify burrowing owl,
the species has a low to moderate potential to occur. As a mitigation measure for the proposed
project, the City will require a pre-construction presence/absence survey for burrowing owl to
be conducted within 30 days of the commencement of project-related grading or other land
disturbance activities to ensure that the species has not moved onto the site since completion
of the surveys. The pre-construction survey should occur within 30 days prior to ground
disturbing activity. Owls located as a result of survey efforts will be relocated. If burrowing owl
have colonized the project site or the offsite improvements area prior to the initiation of
construction, the project proponent should immediately inform the City, RCA and the Wildlife
Agencies, and coordinate on the potential need for preparation, review and approval of a
Burrowing Owl Protection and Relocation Plan, prior to any ground disturbance.
Therefore, the subject project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures
of the MSHCP.
6. The Project is consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines.
PC Reso. No. 2022-____
Page 4 of 5
According to section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP, the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines are
intended to address indirect effects associated with locating development in proximity to the
MSHCP Conservation Area. The project site is not near a conservation area. Therefore, the
Urban/Wildlife Interface Guidelines are not applicable.
7. The Project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements.
There are no resources located on the project sites requiring mapping as set forth in MSHCP
Section 6.3.1.
8. 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. The project is not located within or adjacent to MSHCP Conservation Areas.
Since the project site is not immediately adjacent to a MSHCP Conservancy Area, the
proposed project 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. The project will incorporate the BMPs
outlined in Volume I, Appendix C of the MSHCP as part of the development. Therefore, the
project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.4 of the
MSHCP.
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 site is not within or adjacent to any MSHCP Criteria Cell or conservation areas.
As described above, the project complies with all applicable 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 18th day of January, 2022.
John, Chairman
PC Reso. No. 2022-____
Page 5 of 5
Attest:
___________________________________
Justin Kirk,
Assistant Community Development Director
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE )
I, Justin Kirk, Assistant Community Development Director of the City of Lake Elsinore, California,
hereby certify that Resolution No. 2022-__ was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City
of Lake Elsinore, California, at a regular meeting held on January 18, 2022 and that the same
was adopted by the following vote:
AYES
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Justin Kirk,
Assistant Community Development Director