Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Reso No 2007-146RESOLUTION NO. 2007-146 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING FINDINGS THAT THE RAMSGATE APPLICATIONS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP) WHEREAS, the Shopoff Group has submitted applications for Annexation No. 79, General Plan Amendment No. 2007-01, Pre-Annexation Zone Change No. 2007-01, Ramsgate Specific Plan No. 89-1 Sixth Revision, Tentative Tract Map No. 32537 and Tentative Tract Map No. 35422 ("Ramsgate Applications"), to entitle property located approximately one mile east of Interstate 15, south of Highway 74, and west of Greenwald Avenue (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, Section 6.0 of the MSHCP requires that all projects which are proposed on land covered by an MSHCP criteria cell and which require discretionary approval by the legislative body undergo the Lake Elsinore Acquisirion Process ("LEAP") and a Joint Project Review ("JPR") between the City and the Regional Conservation Authority ("RCA") prior to public review of the project applications; and WHEREAS, Section 6.0 of the MSHCP further requires that development projects not within an MSHCP criteria cell must be analyzed pursuant to the MSHCP "Plan Wide Requirements"; and . WHEREAS, the Ramsgate Applications are discretionary in nature and require review and approval by the legislative body; and WHEREAS, the Ramsgate Applications are within the Elsinare Plan Area of the MSHCP, but are not within an MSHCP Criteria Cell, Core or Linkage; and WHEREAS, Section 6.0 of the MSHCP requires that the City adopt consistency findings prior to approving any discretionary project entitlements for development of property that is subject to the MSHCP; and WHEREAS, after considering the Ramsgate Applications at a regular meeting held on July 17, 2007, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore recommended that the City Council find that the Ramsgate Applications are consistent with the MSHCP; and CITY COiJNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2007-146 PAGE 2 OF 6 WHEREAS, public norice of the Ramsgate Applications has been given, and the City Council has considered the Planning Commissions recommendation and evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on August 14, 2007. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CTTY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION l. The City Council has considered the Ramsgate Applications and their consistency with the MSHCP prior to making a decision to find the Ramsgate Applications consistent with the MSHCP. SECTION 2. That in accordance with the MSHCP; the City Council makes the following findings: l. The proposed project is a project under the City's MSHCP Resolution, and the City must make an MSHCP Consistency finding before approval. The Ramsgate Applications include two (2) tentative tract maps and a host of related discretionary requests, including CEQA review. Pursuant to the City's MSHCP Resolution, the Ramsgate Applications have 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), Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines (MSHCP, § 61.4), Vegetation Mapping (MSHCP, ,~ 6.3.1) requirements, Additional Survey Needs and Procedures (MSHCP, ~ 6.3.2), Fuels Management Guidelines (MSHCP, ,~ 6.4), and payment of the MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee (MSHCP Ordinance, ~ 4). 2. The proposed project is subject to the City's LEAP and the County's Joint Project Review processes. The Property is within the MSHCP Elsinore Area Plan but is not located in a Criteria Cell, Core or Linkage. Therefore, a formal LEAP application was not required by the City. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2007-146 PAGE 3 OF 6 3. The proposed project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines. The disturbed wetland onsite is considered riparian/riverine, although none of the riparian/riverine covered species have any potential to occur onsite. Seasonal ponds occur onsite, some of which possess indicators of all three wetland parameters (soils, vegetation and hydrology). Wet season surveys for sensitive fairy shrimp were negative. A Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP) analysis report was prepared to address impacts to disturbed wetland, which describes why avoidance of seasonal disturbed wetland is not feasible or preferable, quantifies unavoidable impacts, describes features and measures to reduce indirect effects, and makes findings that demonstrate that the project would be biologically equivalent or superior to an avoidance alternative. Because the disturbed wetland onsite is of low quality, preservation of the disturbed wetland is not considered feasible or desirable. In order to avoid the disturbed wetland onsite, a minimum of ten percent (10%) of the housing units would need to be eliminated. The resulting preservation would leave small, isolated disturbed wetland areas surrounded by housing development that drain into existing residential development areas. 772e alternative is not considered feasible because a viable reserve cannot be reasonably implemented at this location, and superior mitigation options are available offsite that would provide for better long-term consef-vation of the resources being impacted onsite. Mitigation for impacts would include acquisition of 0.54 acre for restoration on property known as the "Cloverleaf" in the southern end of Lake Elsinore, or other offsite mitigation parcels acceptable to the City and resource agencies. The riparian habitat restored within the "Cloverleaf" site will be of a much higher quality than the disturbed wetland habitat being impacted, and will contribute to long-term MSHCP conservation goals. The offsite acquisition meets the definition of a Biologically Equivalent Preservation Alternative consistent with Section 6.1.2. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2007-146 PAGE 4 OF 6 4. The proposed project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines. The Property not located within the NEPSSA as shown on Figure 6-1 of the MSHCP and therefore the Ramsgate Applications are consistent with MSHCP Section 6.1.3. 5. The proposed project is consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines. Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP sets forth guidelines which are intended to address indirect effects associated with locating development in proximity to the MSHCP Conservation Area, where applicable. To minimize Edge Effects, guidelines shall be implemented in conjunction with review of individual public and private development projects in proximity to the MSHCP Conservation Area. The Property is not located adjacent to conserved land or other applicable open space and therefore, an assessment of indirect impacts associated with the Urban/Wildlands Interf'ace is not required. 6. The proposed project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements. The Ramsgate Applications were subject to the Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine and Vernal Pool policies, and as such, any related resources were mapped as part of the Determination of Biological Equivalent or Superior Preservation submittal. No other circumstances for which vegetation is required were applicable. The Ramsgate Applications are consistent with MSHCP Section 6.3.1. 7. The proposed project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures. The Property is outside of any Criteria Area Species Survey Area for plants, amphibians and mammals, and no Criteria Area Species Survey Area plant species were observed during site surveys. The Property occurs within the burrowing owl survey area. No owls were observed durtng surveys onsite. Therefore, the Ramsgate Applications are consistent with MSHCP Section 6.3.2. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2007-146 PAGE 5 OF 6 8. The proposed project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines. The Property is not located adjacent to conserved Zand or other applicable open space and therefore, any further action related to Fuels Management is not applicable. 9. The proposed project will/will not be conditioned to pay the City's MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee. The applicant will be conditioned to pay the City's MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fees. lO.The proposed project overall is consistent with the MSHCP. The Ramsgate Applications are consistent with the MSHCP and provide effective mitigation measures for conservation to meet the biological issues and considerations of the MSHCP. SECTION 3. Based upon all of the evidence presented, both written and testimonial, the above findings, and the conditions of approval imposed upon each of the Ramsgate Applications, the City Council hereby finds the Ramsgate Applications consistent with the MSHCP. SECTION 4. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14`h day of August, 2007, by the following vote: AYES: COiJNCILMEMBERS: su~kley, xickman, xelley Schiffner., Magee NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COLJNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2007-146 PAGE 6 OF 6 ATTEST: ~ ~,~~~.~.~ ',~ ~~ Michelle Soto, Interim City Clerk City of Lake Elsinore AP OVED A, TO F l bara Zeid eibo d, City Attorney City of Lake Elsinore