Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Reso No 2015-54 (7.7.15)RESOLUTION NO. 2015-54 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, FINDING THAT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-07 IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN WHEREAS, Familia Nacida de Nuevo has requested approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-07 to allow the establishment of a church located in a previously constructed 24,220 square foot building ("Project"). The subject site is located at 575 Chaney Street (APN: 377-430-076) and has a General Plan Land Use Designation of Limited Manufacturing and is zoned Commercial Manufacturing; and WHEREAS, Section 6.0 of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) requires that all discretionary projects within an MSHCP criteria cell undergo the Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process ("LEAP") and 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 of Lake Elsinore adopt consistency findings demonstrating that the proposed discretionary entitlement complies with the MSCHP cell criteria, and the MSCHP goals and objectives; and WHEREAS, pursuant to LEMC Chapter 17.168 (Conditional Use Permits) the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of reviewing and approving, conditionally approving, or denying conditional use permits; and WHEREAS, on July 7, 2015 at a duly noticed public hearing the Planning 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 Planning Commission has considered the Project and its consistency with the MSHCP prior adopting Findings of Consistency with the MSHCP. SECTION 2. That in accordance with the MSHCP, the Planning 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 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2015-54 PAGE 2 OF 4 Cell. Based upon the site reconnaissance survey there are no issues regarding consistency with the MSCHP's other "Plan Wide Requirements." The only requirements potentially applicable to the Project were the Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines (Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP) and payment of the MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee (Section 4 of the MSHCP Ordinance). The Project site has is located in a previously developed building, and has no habitat, including riparian/riverine areas or vernal pools, present on site. 2. The Project is not subject to the City's LEAP and the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority's (RCA) Joint Project Review processes. As stated above, the Project is not located within a Criteria Cell and therefore the Project was not processed through the City's LEAP and a Joint Project Review. 3. The Project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines. The project consists of the placement of a church use within an existing industrial building on a fully developed site. As such, the RiparianlRiverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP are not applicable. 4. The Project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines. The site does not fall within any Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Areas. Neither a habitat assessment nor further focused surveys are required for the Project. Therefore, Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines as set forth 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 certain species if the Project is located in Criteria Area Species Survey Areas, Amphibian Species Survey Areas, Burrowing 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 MSCHP Section 6.3.2 are not applicable. 6. The Project is consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines. The Project site is not within or adjacent to any MSHCP criteria or PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2015-54 PAGE 3OF4 conservation areas. Therefore, the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines of MSHCP Section 6.1.4 are not applicable. 7. The Project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements. The project consists of the placement of a church use within an existing industrial building on a fully developed site. There are no resources located on the Project site requiring mapping as set forth in MSCHP Section 6.3.1. 8. The Project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines. The Project site is not within or adjacent to any MSHCP criteria or conservation areas. Therefore, the Fuels Management Guidelines of MSHCP Section 6.4 are not applicable. 9. The Project will be conditioned to pay the City's MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee. The project consists of the placement of a church use within an existing industrial building on a fully developed site. The project does not propose any construction as such no permits are required. 10. The Project is consistent with the MSHCP. The project consists of the placement of a church use within an existing industrial building on a fully developed site. As described above, the project complies with all application MSHCP requirements. SECTION 3. Based upon all of the evidence presented and the above findings, the Planning Commission hereby finds that the Project is consistent with the MSHCP. SECTION 4. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. vote: PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of July 2015, by the following --- Jo Gray, Chairm n Ci of e Elsinore PI Ing Commission PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2015-54 PAGE 4OF4 ATTEST: Richard J. M cHott, LEED Green Associate Planning Manager STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE SS CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE I, Richard J. MacHott, Planning Manager of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, hereby certify that Resolution No. 2015-54 as adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore at a regular meeting held on the 7th day of July, 2015, and that the same was adopted by the following vote: AYES: CHAIRMAN GRAY, VICE CHAIR JORDAN, COMMISSIONER ARMIT COMMISSIONER FLEMING, COMMISSIONER RAY NOES: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE ABSENT: NONE J Richard acHott, LEED Green Associate Planning Manager