The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutResolution 2021-29 PA 2019-64 Consistent with MSHCPRESOLUTION NO. 2021-29 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTION OF FINDINGS THAT PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 2019-64 (TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 38008 AND RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2020-04) IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP) Whereas, Tri Pointe Homes has filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore (City) requesting approval of Planning Application No. 2019-64 (Tentative Tract Map No. 38008 and Residential Design Review No. 2020-04) proposing to subdivide the approximately 9.07 acre site into one (1) 5.37 acre condominium lot with 60 detached condominium units, three (3) open space lots and one (1) water quality detention basin. The project also proposes the design and construction of 60 detached two-story condominium units ranging in size from 1,793 sq. ft. to 2,288 sq. ft., preliminary plotting, conceptual wall and fence plan, and related improvements located for TTM 38008. The project is located within Phase 8, Planning Area 2B of the Canyon Hills Specific Plan, Amendment No. 4, on the northeast side of the intersection of Railroad Canyon and Tassel Way (APN: 363-940-011); 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 Chapter 16.24 (Tentative Map) and Section 17.415.050 (Major Design Review) 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 tentative maps and design review applications; and, Whereas, on June 1, 2021 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: Section 1: The Commission 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 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. DocuSign Envelope ID: 2EE2FD1D-7454-4E0D-974F-6E256D77D952 PC Reso. No. 2021-29 Page 2 of 3 Pursuant to the City’s MSHCP resolution, the project must be reviewed for MSHCP consistency, consistent with the Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines (MSHCP, Section 6.1.2), Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines (MSHCP, Section 6.1.3), Additional Survey Needs and Procedures (MSHCP, Section 6.3.2), Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines (MSHCP, Section 6.1.4), Vegetation Mapping (MSHCP, Section 6.3.1) requirements, Fuels Management Guidelines (MSHCP, Section 6.4), and payment of the MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee (MSHCP Ordinance, Section 4). The Project has been reviewed in light of these sections and is consistent therewith. 2. The Project is subject to the City’s LEAP and the County’s Joint Project Review processes. The project is located within the MSHCP Elsinore Area Plan but is not located within a MSHCP Criteria Cell. Therefore, the project was not required to go through the LEAP or JPR processes. 3. The Project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines. The project site has been previously completely disturbed and graded per the previously approved underlying Tract Map No. 36118. As such, the Riparian/Riverine 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 previously approved underlying Tract Map No. 36118 was consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP. Additionally, based upon prior approvals, the entire project site has been graded and any plant species which may have existed on the site have been removed. It is for these reasons that the project is consistent with the aforementioned guidelines. 5. The Project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures. The previously approved underlying Tract Map No. 36118 was consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures as set forth in Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP. The entire project site has been graded pursuant to previously issued permits. The project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures of the MSHCP. 6. The Project is consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines. The previously approved underlying Tract Map No. 36118 was consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP. 7. The Project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements. The previously approved underlying Tract Map No. 36118 was consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements as set forth in Section 6.3.1 of the MSHCP. Mapping was conducted as part of the biological surveys for the original project. The project has not been modified from that which was previously approved and therefore is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements. 8. The Project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines. DocuSign Envelope ID: 2EE2FD1D-7454-4E0D-974F-6E256D77D952 PC Reso. No. 2021-29 Page 3 of 3 The previously approved underlying Tract Map No. 36118 was consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.4 of the MSHCP. The proposed project complies with the previously approved the Fuels Management Guidelines and therefore is consistent with the Fuel Management Guidelines. 9.The Project overall is consistent with the MSHCP. 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 at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, this 1st day of June 2021. Rendell Klaarenbeek Chair 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. 2021-29 was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, at a regular meeting held on June 1, 2021 and that the same was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Carroll, Peters, and Dobler; Vice Chair Gray; and Chair Klaarenbeek NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Justin Kirk Assistant Community Development Director FOR: FOR: DocuSign Envelope ID: 2EE2FD1D-7454-4E0D-974F-6E256D77D952