HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 2025-39 - RDR 2023-05 - MSCHP - Riverside Drive AparmentsRESOLUTION NO. 2025-39
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING FINDINGS THAT RESIDENTIAL DESIGN
REVIEW NO. 2023-05 IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE
COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP)
Whereas, Elevated Entitlements, LLC, has filed an application with the City of Lake
Elsinore (City) requesting approval of Planning Application No. 2023-06 for a Residential Design
Review (RDR No. 2023-05) for the design and construction of a 96-unit multi-family residential
apartment complex within twelve residential buildings. The project also proposes a 1,597 sq. ft.
clubhouse with onsite recreational amenities, and other related site improvements on a 4.95-acre
site located in the Residential Mixed Use (RMU) zoning district. The proposed project is located
at 32281 Riverside Drive and encompasses Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 379-315-033;
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;
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;
Whereas, pursuant to Section 17.415.050 (Major Design Review) of the Lake Elsinore
Municipal Code (LEMC), the Planning Commission (Commission) has the responsibility of
reviewing and approving, conditionally approving, or denying design review applications; and,
Whereas, on November 4, 2025, 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 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, §
Docusign Envelope ID: 6DEA9DDE-F0C8-4E5B-B4E7-7650B941E792
PC Reso. No. 2025-39
Page 2 of 5
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 Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP)
focuses on Riparian/Riverine Resources Assessment Needs and Considerations. It outlines
the importance of assessing riparian and riverine areas for their ecological functions and
values, which are crucial for plan-listed species. Key factors to consider include hydrology,
flood storage, nutrient retention, sediment trapping, and wildlife habitat.
According to the MSHCP, features are riverine if they are natural in origin, even if past natural
or have been heavily modified and/or redirected. They can include features indirectly created
through human-made manipulation of the landscape, including channelization of a historic
riverine feature. If these features connect to nearby downstream resources on either existing
or described conservation lands, they are considered riverine.
The Biological Survey prepared by BioCultural, LLC dated October 2024, did not detect
aquatic features, including areas that could be or could have been considered riverine on the
Project Site, which has been the subject of substantial human modification dating back to the
1930s when agricultural groves existed on the site based on a 1938 aerial photograph and
the results of a literature review by BioCultural, LLC. Later, and up until the 1980s, the project
site hosted a health spa.
The MSHCP defines vernal pools as “seasonal wetlands that occur in depression areas that
have wetlands indicators of all three parameters (soils, vegetation and hydrology) during the
wetter portion of the growing season but normally lack wetlands indicators of hydrology and/or
vegetation during the drier portion of the growing season.” It goes on to explain that “Evidence
concerning the persistence of an area's wetness can be obtained from its history, vegetation,
soils, and drainage characteristics, uses to which it has been subjected, and weather and
hydrologic records.” Vernal pools do, in fact, have a unique flora and fauna that are distinct
for seasonally-wetted depressions.
The site soil is Garretson fine sandy loam, a soil type not considered hydric by the Natural
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). This soil, therefore, does not support standing
water or the development of pools or ponds. A review of aerial imagery shows no indication
of surface water or soil saturation over multiple years and seasons. Further, the area would
not be considered a “vernal pool” because indicator plant species such as woolly-marbles
(Psilocarphus brevissimus), toad rush (Juncus bufonius), or watercress (Crassula aquatica)
are not present.
Plant species observed in the immediate area consist of many non-native and ruderal species
such as Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), short-pod mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), wall barley
(Hordeum murinum), cheesebush (Malva parviflora), tumbleweed (Amaranthus albus), and
Docusign Envelope ID: 6DEA9DDE-F0C8-4E5B-B4E7-7650B941E792
PC Reso. No. 2025-39
Page 3 of 5
puncture vine (Tribulus terrestris), which are considered upland or facultative upland species.
There are no ephemeral pools on the project site and, therefore, no habitat for this species.
The Project is therefore consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool
Guidelines set forth in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP. No further action regarding this section
of the MSHCP is required.
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 project site is not located within a designated survey area for burrowing
owl, Criteria Area Plant Species, or any other MSHCP designated taxon. Nevertheless, the
proximity to past burrowing owl surveys and observations were considered and a burrowing
owl was conducted.
The Burrowing Owl Survey determined that the Project site has suitable habitat for burrowing
owls, including portions of walls, pipes, and standpipes that exist on site from the remains of
a demolished building. While suitable habitat is present on the Project site, no burrowing owls
were found on the Project site during the survey. As a result, the report recommended 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.
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.
Docusign Envelope ID: 6DEA9DDE-F0C8-4E5B-B4E7-7650B941E792
PC Reso. No. 2025-39
Page 4 of 5
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 4th day of November, 2025.
John Gray
Chair
Docusign Envelope ID: 6DEA9DDE-F0C8-4E5B-B4E7-7650B941E792
PC Reso. No. 2025-39
Page 5 of 5
Attest:
___________________________________
Damaris Abraham
Community Development Director
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE )
I, Damaris Abraham, Community Development Director of the City of Lake Elsinore, California,
hereby certify that Resolution No. 2025-39 was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City
of Lake Elsinore, California, at a regular meeting held November 4, 2025, and that the same was
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Devor, Pease and Peters; and Chair Gray
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Vice Chair Carroll
Damaris Abraham
Community Development Director
Docusign Envelope ID: 6DEA9DDE-F0C8-4E5B-B4E7-7650B941E792