The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCC Reso No 2007-142RESOLUTION NO. 2007-142 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, MAKING FINDINGS THAT THE PROJECT KNOWN AS LEAP 2005-12 FOR A 9.09 ACRE PROPERTY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP) WHEREAS, Castle & Cooke California, Inc. has submitted an application for a Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process No. 2005-12 ("LEAP 2005-12") for a 9.09 acre property located at the southwest corner of the I-15 Freeway and Lake Street and known as a portion of APN: 390-130-017; and WHEREAS, the applicant requests that the City Council consider and find that the "development footprint," including a conservation corridor of approximately 2.09 acres depicted in LEAP 2005-12, is consistent with the MSHCP; and WHEREAS, after considering LEAP 2005-12 and its consistency with the MSHCP at its July 3, 2007 meeting, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore recommended that the City Council make findings that LEAP 2005-12 is consistent with the MSHCP; and WHEREAS, public notice of LEAP 2005-12 has been given, and the City Council has considered the Planning Commission's recommendation and evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on July 24, 2007. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Councii has considered the development footprint of 7.0 acres (78% of the site) and conservation corridor of 2.09 acres (22% of the site) proposed in LEAP 2005-12. Based upon the following findings, the City Council determines that the development footprint and conservation corridor presented in LEAP 2005-12 is consistent with all of the required procedures, policies, guidelines and provisions of the MSHCP. The proposed project is a project under the City's MSHCP Resolution, and the City must make an MSHCP Consistency finding before approval. The proposed project is subject to a LEAP review to defermine the area for conservation located on the project site. Pursuant to the City's MSHCP Resolution, the projecYs development footprint must 6e reviewed for MSHCP consistency, consistent with the Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines (MSHCP, Sec. 6.1.2), Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines (MSHCP, Sec. 6.1.3), Additional Survey Needs and Procedures (MSHCP, Sec. 6.3.2), Urban/Wildlands Inferface Guidelines (MSHCP, Sec. 6.1.4), Vegetation Mapping repuirements (MSHCP, Sec.6.3.1), Fuels Management Guidelines (MSHCP, Sec. 6.4), and payment of the MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee (MSHCP Ordinance, Sec. 4). 2. The proposed project is subject to the City's LEAP and the County's Joint Project Review processes. The project site is within the MSHCP Lake Elsinore Area Plan, MSHCP Cell Group Criteria Area `:l'; and Constrained Linkage #6. Therefore, a formal LEAP application, LEAP 2005-12, was submitted to the City on September 21, 2005. This application and documentation was reviewed by the City Planning Commission on July 3, 2007 and it was determined that no additional conservation is required for compliance with the MSHCP because the 2.09 acres of conservation riparian corridor (22% of the total project site) complies with the criteria cell criteria for Cell Group "J" and provides biologically adequate corridor design for Constrained Linkage #6 as it runs through the project site. 3. The proposed project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines. No vernal pools exist on the site and therefore vernal pool species will not occur on site due to a lack of vernal pool habitaf. Impacts fo riparian habitats are avoided by the projecYs development footprint. There are no impacfs to the riparian wetlands (which average 6-8 feef in width) on-site due to the projecYs development footprint setbacks from the riparian corridor that varies from 400' on the east to 75' on the west side of the project site. The projecYs biology report found that less than 1% of nafive riparian planf species reside on site and that the sife is dominated by non- native invasive eucalyptus trees. Furthermore, the project site contains none of the MSHCP described six (6) protected avian species due to the lack of adequate on site habitat. 4. The proposed 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 (NEPSSA). Therefore, no focused surveys are required for the NEPSSA and presence/absence surveys did not identify any of the subject species. Additionally, no NEPSSA species were observed during any of the biological surveys conducted on the project site. Based on its location outside any NEPSSA and the lack of any NEPSSA species being 2 observed during biological surveys, fhe project is consistent with MSHCP Section 6.1.3. 5. The proposed project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures. The project sife is located outside of any Critical Area Species Survey Area (CASSA) for plants and mammals. No CASSA plant species were observed during the biology surveys for the site. Burrowing owls were a/so surveyed and negative results indicated no presence or habitat for the burrowing owl. The project is consistent with the policies of MSHCP Section 6.3.2. 6. The proposed project is consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines. The project site is located across the 1-15 Freeway and across Lake Street near land that has been set aside for MSHCP conservation. Therefore, the project is required to comply with the policies set forfh in Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP. Through implementation of the set aside of the 2.09 acres, the project would minimize the management challenges that can arise from development being located near conserved habitat. The project will be consistent with the policies set forth in 6.1.4. 7. The proposed project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements. The vegetation of the project site has been mapped as part of the City's LEAP application. The mapping is consistent with the MSHCP mapping profocols. The mapping is sufficient under fhe MSHCP and found less than 1% of the MSHCP Criteria Cell and Cell Group and Constrained Linkage #6 identified vegetation on-site. The project biologists determined that because fhe project sife /acks adequate habifat, the six (6) MSHCP identified special avian species will not reside on the project site. The vegetation mapping is sufficient under the MSHCP and is consisfent with the MSHCP requirements. 8. The proposed project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines. Upon submittal of a Design Review, a condition will be added to insure consistency with the Fuels Management Guidelines. 9. The proposed project will be conditioned to pay the City's MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee. Any future project proposed to be located on the 9.09 acre site will have to pay the City's MSHCP Loca/ Development Mitigation Fee. 3 10. The proposed project overall is consistent with the MSHCP. The City Council determines that fhe proposed project's 2.09 acre conservation area is consistent with Cell Group "J': The City Council finds that the width of fhe Constrained Linkage #6 is specifically cited in the MSHCP EIR/EIS text as not being set or characterized by the MSHCP Cell Group Criteria but rather, linkage corridor widths are determined by site specific biology and on-site conditions on a case-by-case basis. The City Council hereby determines that the expert biology testimony presented by Dr. Jack Turner supports the conclusion thaf the 2.09 acre conservafion is area is su~cient to supporf the species that are found on- sife. Furthermore, the project sife plan, including the 2.09 acre conservation riparian corridor of 400'to 75' width wifh an average width of 125; will adequately provide the riparian conservation area necessary to move the six (6) MSHCP identified species through the riparian corridor when adequate riparian habitat is restored to the project conservation site. The City Council finds that no adequate MSHCP identified habitat exists on the project site today to attract the MSHCP identified 6 special avian species. SECTION 2. Based upon all of the evidence presented, both oral and written, and the above findings, the City Councii hereby finds that LEAP 2005-12 is consistent with the MSHCP. SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND IPTE on t s 2 E T E. AG CITY OF LAKE ~ of July 2007. YOR ATES: VIVIAN MUNSON, CITY CLERK CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE AP ROVED A$ T R. / ~ ~, BARA ID LEIBOLD, CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 4 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ) ss. ) I, VIVIAN M. MUNSON, City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, hereby certify that Resolution No. zoo~-i42 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore at a regular meeting held on the 24th day of July 2007, and that the same was adopted by the following vote: AYES: MAYOR ROBERT MAGEE, MAYOR PRO TEM DARYL HICKMAN, COUNCILMEMAER GENIE KELLEY, COUNCILMEMAER ROBERT SCHIFFNER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS BUCKLEY ABSTAIN: NoNE ABSENT: rroNs V IAN M. MUNSO CITY CLERK 5