Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 2025-43 - RDR 2024-09 - Tuscany Crest - MSHCPRESOLUTION NO. 2025-43 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING FINDINGS THAT PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 2024-19 (RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2024-09) IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP) Whereas, Kurt Bausback, KB Homes, has filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore (City) requesting approval of Planning Application No. 2024-19 for Residential Design Review No. 2024-09 to construct a total of 131 new detached single-family residences and related site improvements on a 37.3-acre site within Tract Map No. 25475. The project site is within Planning Area 6 of the Ramsgate Specific Plan and has a Medium Low Density (MLD) land use designation. The project site is located southeast of Highway 74, west of Greenwald Avenue, and north of Interstate 15 and encompasses Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 349-240-034, 349- 240-038, 349-240-072, and 349-240-075); 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 Planning 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. Pursuant to the City’s MSHCP Resolution, the project has 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), Docusign Envelope ID: 6DEA9DDE-F0C8-4E5B-B4E7-7650B941E792 PC Reso. No. 2025-43 Page 3 of 4 Additional Survey Needs and Procedures (MSHCP, § 6.3.2), Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines (MSHCP, § 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. The project site is within the MSHCP Lake Elsinore Area Plan and lies within Criteria Cell 4176 and Independent Criteria Cells 4174, 4178, and 4272. A formal and complete LEAP application, LEAP 2005-10, was previously submitted to the City on December 9, 2005. The City previously reviewed the application and determined that TTM 25475 had complied with MSHCP “Other Plan Requirements” and the City’s LEAP determination was submitted to RCA for its JPR and was given a finding of consistency by the RCA on May 1, 2006. As such, the JPR process with RCA was previously completed and no further review is necessary for the proposed Residential Design Review. 3. The Project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines. No vernal pools exist on the site; therefore, vernal pool species are not expected to occur. Section 6.1. 2 of the MSHCP focuses on protection of riparian/ riverine areas and vernal pool habitat types based on their value in the conservation of a number of MSHCP-covered species, none of which has any potential to occur on the project site. Any impacts to the southern willow scrub and herbaceous wetland are the result of off-site road improvements. Relocation of the roads is not feasible without eliminating access to the project site and impacts cannot be reduced by an alternative location, since all of the drainages would still need to be crossed. Impacts to the small riparian area and unvegetated drainages will be mitigated through acquisition of credits from the Riverside-Corona Resource Conservation District Mitigation Bank, which provides significant enhancement to riparian habitat along the Santa Ana River through removal of giant reed (Arundo donax). A number of the species targeted for conservation through consistency with Section 6.1.2 occur within bank boundaries, and the bank is within the MSHCP Conservation Area boundaries. 4. The Project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines. The project site is not located within the NEPSSA as shown on Figure 6- 1 of the MSHCP; however, an MSHCP Narrow Endemic Species (Munz' s onion) was observed in the north- central portion of TTM No. 25475. This population of the Munz' s onion occurs outside of the Conservation Area spelled out in the Cell Criteria for the tentative tract and the project site is not one of the fifteen known locations targeted for conservation. Additionally, since the site lies outside o fa NEPSSA or Critical Area Species Survey Area (CASSA), no conservation is required. Based on its location outside of any NEPSSA or CASSA, the project is compliant with MSHCP Section 6.1.3. 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 Criteria Docusign Envelope ID: 6DEA9DDE-F0C8-4E5B-B4E7-7650B941E792 PC Reso. No. 2025-43 Page 4 of 4 Area Species Survey Areas, Amphibian Species Survey Areas with Critical Area, Burrowing Owl Survey Areas with Criteria Area, and Mammal Species Survey Areas with Criteria Areas of the MSHCP. The project site is located outside of any Critical Area Species Survey Area (CASSA) for plants and mammals and no CASSA plant species were observed during the focused surveys for the site. However, the TTM No. 25475 site is located within the area requiring burrowing owl surveys. A burrowing owl habitat and burrow survey was conducted on the TTM No. 25475 site in August 2004 by PCR Services Corporation. The habitat assessment found that the study area exhibited multiple key indicators of suitable burrowing owl habitat including occurrence of low-growing vegetation and the presence of small fossorial mammal burrows. However, no burrowing owl sign was observed during the habitat assessment and burrow survey, and the burrowing owl is not expected to occur at this site. Additionally, the site was surveyed on multiple occasions during other focused surveys by biologists familiar with the burrowing owl. No owls were observed during any of these surveys; therefore, TTM No. 25475 is consistent with the policies of MSHCP Section 6.3. 2. However, as required by the MSHCP, an additional pre-construction survey for burrowing owls will be included as a condition of project approval. 6. The Project is consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines. The site is located adjacent to land that has been set aside for conservation. Therefore, the project is required to comply with the policies set forth in Section 6.1. 4. Future Development in proximity to the MSHCP Conservation Area may result in Edge Effects that will adversely affect biological resources within the MSHCP Conservation Area. To minimize such Edge Effects, the following guidelines shall be implemented in conjunction with review of individual public and private Development projects in proximity to the MSHCP Conservation Area. Through the implementation of mitigation measures, the project will minimize the adverse effects of the project on conservation configuration and will minimize management challenges that can arise from development being located adjacent to conserved habitat; and will be consistent with the policies set forth in MSHCP Section 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 for TTM 25475. This mapping is consistent with MSHCP mapping protocol. The mapping is sufficient under the MSHCP and is consistent with the MSHCP requirements. 8. The project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines. The project site has been designed to include Fuel Modification Zones along its north and west boundaries in open space adjacent to the Conservation Areas. The proposed project has been designed so that no additional take of conserved habitat will be necessary for fuel modification purposes. Within the project open space area, plantings are limited to fire-resistant, non-invasive native species from the list contained within the MSHCP Ordinance and reviewed by the City’s Fire Department. All fuel management areas will exist outside of the MSHCP Conservation Area. TTM 25475 is therefore consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines. 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. Docusign Envelope ID: 6DEA9DDE-F0C8-4E5B-B4E7-7650B941E792 PC Reso. No. 2025-43 Page 5 of 4 10. The Project is consistent with the MSHCP. The project is consistent with the MSHCP and meets the biological issues and considerations of the MSHCP. Section 3: Based upon the evidence presented, both written and testimonial, and the above findings, the Commission hereby finds 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 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. 2025-43 was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, at a regular meeting held November 04, 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