HomeMy WebLinkAbout08.01.2006 PC AGENDA
/
"':'~r
r
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
GCOMMlS8ION AGENDA
WWW.LAKI-ELSINORE.ORG
(95i) 674-3124 PHONE
(951) 674--23!J1- FAX
LAKE ELSINORE CULl'URAL CENTER. - -
183 NORTH MAIN STREET
v
TlJESDAY,AUGI1ST 1, 2006
6:00 P.M.
r
<r
r..".
If,4'u ar~lJ#eIIdi",tlJsPlanning. Commission Meeting please park in thePal'lfi>>g .
tPt- . ."" '6' stri!d/rom the Cultural Center. This will assist us in llmtdiJg tlte
-1.]ia<<,'ojiHeetings 0" the Downtown Business District. Thllltkyou for -,(1""
:cii.-,atItJ"t " .
~I~ORDEI!
"f~1~rSl~S ....~N AGE~IZED ITEMS - 3 .1\PNUTltS. .'
(pleaserecttr& complete a Speaker's Format the Podium, prior to.the Start 'of the
Planning Commission -Meeting)
~N~!tN'f C~_~ITEMS -"
(All matters on the COrtsent Calendar are approved in one motion, unless a
Commissioner or any members of the public requests separate action on a specific
" action.)
1.
Minutes
~'>;--'- . - -;,' ',','
a. RegUliU\Plal1uing Commission Meeting Minutes for lune 20, 2006
~ -... >
<>"-,""':",;'"
,-.,'-'-','--,: ". - .
~~~~~:-~~~t[~i~:---_t,:;-~~-:-A~i>>:_~~-
~.>"" - >c_~__ ~,
, >>.4i~I~-<
_~ .~~:>1;;-
r
C.COMMISSION A.GEM>A- Augu$t 1, 1006
r
..:fl/lLI~ BE~Qlll~
^, ',' -, -, - - < -',_: .,.,.' , '--', ~'."'- ,', "
ete a Speaker's Form at the Podium prior to the start of the
Meeting. The Chairman~ill call on .you to speak wheny()Ul'
.. (please read &
," Planlling Co . ~...'
item is called.)., ,.
1.te.;AmendDlent No. 2006-01'01 the Lake Elsinore Mumcioal Code ' .
· .StMlis requesting an. amendment to portions of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code
. 'Section 17 .66 (parking Requirements) related to the 1) Elimination of compact
par . ' , . · commercial and industrial zones; 2) Modifying the width
of. , . ,Within commercial and induStrial zones; and 3) Establishing a
'mjni..' ..stteet parking requirement for medical offices.
Tom Weiner, Planning Manager
, Ext. 270" tweiner@lake-elsinore.org
RECOMMENDATION:
Appr()val
r
',. Th~:at;requests approval to revise the Ramsgate Specific Plan. No. 89-1.
6ne)~.evW . 'Jneludesa request to add a medium high density/,residential
, de~erilto the tn,ix of housing types in the specific plan,withaPRropriat~
, defj1#ll 'standards and gUidelines. The product is proposed at the southwest'.
corner of Rosetta Canyon Drive and State Route 74, replacing theeonnnereial
site at this location. The applicant is: also requesting to incorporate. the'
conveyance oflandto permanent open space within the specific plan, for coastal
sage scrub preservation and wildlife habitat conservation andincorpora.te the
changes to the . ~irculation system of the specific plan necessitated by the
additional allOcation of open space.
"
CASE. PLANNER:
Carole. Donahoe, Project Planner
. Ext. 287; cdonohoe@lak:e.;elsinote.org
.f".'
, '
RECOMMENDATION:
Approval
G COMMISSION AGENDA- August 1, 2006
;':~"i .
r
77. The City of Lake Elsinore is proposing an annex~tion.of .
tely one hundred . fifty..,four (154) acres from ,the County, of '
" de's jurisdiction but within the City of Lake Elsinore's Sphere, of
" ", ce area of the City of Lake Elsinore. The annexa~on has been initiateUby ,
,the City of Lake Elsinore pursuant to the Cortese-Knox-HertzbergLQeal
, i:,Govemment ~rganization Act of2000 (Government Code Seeti. 5~..
',' '560001) and.thestandards, policies and directive of the Riverside Local Agency
Formation Connnission (LAFCO).' . ..
4.
RECOMMENDATION:
ApProval
CASE PLANNER:
('
'E~i~~SSIONE~tS <;OMME~TS
~"'O~NT
r",
~
MINUTES
'"
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
QTY OF LAKE ELSINORE
183 NORTH MAIN STREET
LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530
TUESDAY, JUNE 20, 2006
ABSENT:
6:03:30 PM Chairman O'Neal called the Regular Planning Co
CALL TO ORDER:
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
City Attorney Alisha Santana led the Pledge of A
ROLL CALL
PRESENT:
'"
isendanz, Planning Manager
ana, Senior Planner Matt Harris,
Carlson, Project Planner Carol
as requested to speak.
/'"'
6:04:31 PM . s the President of Lake Elsinore Citizens Committee, invited
everyone to a quarter meeting of the Lake Elsinore Citizens Committee on
Thursday July 1 n the Tuscany Hills Recreation Center at 75 Summerhill Drive.
She noted that Co pervisor Bob Buster will be the guest speaker and the Citizens
Committee keeps Ci ns aware of the growth taking place in Lake Elsinore and gives them
the opportunity to take part in that positive growth. She continued to state that most subjects
between the developer and the City Staff can be worked out by the Planning Commissioners
before they make their recommendation to the Council. The Community gives its members a
place to voice their concerns without going before the Council at the twelfth hour. Opinions
can be voiced through the newsletter and meetings. She thanked the Commission and City
Council for their participation in the Committee. She mentioned that the Committee has
been in existence for two and half years and has over six hundred and fifty members since
the last count. The newsletter goes out to sixty eight hundred registered voters in the City of
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE \ OF
\
a,
PAGE 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -JUNE 20,2006
Lake Elsinore and the Committee is a non profit, non political organization. For further
information please call 674-1989 or 674-2159.
......"
Chairman O'Neal thanked Mrs. Franson for her time.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Minutes
2. Minor Desi n Review for a sin
373-182-026.
MOVED BY GONZALES, SECOND
AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 3-0 TO
NO.1, JUNE 6, 2006 RE
COMMISSION MINUTES.
. Regular Planning Commission Minutes of June 6, 200
Chairman O'Neal requested to pull Items No.2, and
......"
Director of Communi
and asked him to
Commission may
Associate ect as a Minor Design Review for a single
family e Street. The applicant is constructing a 1,581 square
foot sidence with an attached 455 square foot two car
gar e front ch. The total building footprint including residence,
garage an ccupyapproximate 1,159 square feet and will have a net lot
coverage of licant has chosen to construct the proposed single-family
residence using ent ~..... ilar to Mediterranean style architecture and is compliant with
the development s~'Yof the City of Lake Elsinore. On April 20th, the Design Review
Committee reviewed. proposed plan and provided several substantial architectural design,
comments including;"'building and proposed roofing material. Staff has determined that the
proposed project meets all of the design development standards of the LEMC and is exempt
from the California Environmental Quality Act. In conclusion, staff recommends that the
Planning Commission adopt a resolution approving the proposed Minor Design review based
on the findings made in attached exhibit and conditions of approval. This concludes staff s
report and the applicant is present tonight should you have any questions.
Chairman O'Neal brought the discussion back to the dais.
......"
AGENDA ITEM NO. l.
PACE ~ OF Q \
PAGE 3 - PLANNING CDMMISSION MINUTES -JUNE 20,2006
,--
Commissioner Flores had no comments.
Vice Chairman Gonzales had no comments.
Chairman O'Neal questioned if this was a reverse and repeat with 747 and 743 Lake Street.
The applicant Steve Szemenyei concurred.
3.
nce located at 747 Lake Street APN:
Chairman O'Neal expressed that this will be the last time that h
repeat, especially when this project barely meets the minimum
Chairman O'Neal requested any comments.
requested a Motion.
,--
GO ZALES, SECONDED BY FLORES
BY A VOTE OF 3-0 TO ADOPT
NO. 2006-56, APPROVING A MINOR
VIEW FOR A SINGLE FAMILY
G UNIT ON THE NORTH SIDE OF LAKE
ST T; APPROXIMATELY 325 FEET EAST OF
HIGHT STREET AT 747 LAKE STREET, ACCESSOR
PARCEL NUMBER 373-182-025.
4. Minor desie:n review of two (2) sine:le family residences located at 316 & 318
r- Townsend Street (APN 374-105-024).
Chairman O'Neal stated there are a couple of requests to speak on this item.
AGENDA ITEM NO. . \
PAGE ') OF ~\
PAGE 4 - PLANNING CDMMISSIONMINUfES -JUNE 20,2006
.....,
Director of Community Development Mr. Preisendanz introduced Project Planner Linda
Miller and asked her to provide an overview of the project and answer any questions that the
Commission may have.
Project Planner Miller stated that these are two manufactured homes on two adjacent 9,000
square foot lots. The lot on 316 Townsend will include a 1,512 square foot unit with an
attached covered porch and a two car 400 square foot garage. A porte cochere will connect
the garage to the residential unit. The total building footprint is app imately 23% of the lot
area meeting maximum allowable building area of 50%. The ...,J 18 Townsend is at
2,060 square feet with an attached two car garage and attac rch for a total building
footprint of 29% also meeting the maximum allowable b . ea. Both units include
features of the craftsman style of architecture, includi columns, masonry
wainscot, wide window frames and. paned glass wi entries, multiple
roof planes, horizontal siding at gabled ends, decor sed rafter tails.
The front setback area will include automatic . lots will
include 20% of landscaping.
.....,
the rec d from Mr. Louis Jackson Ratliff
approval of the project. She also indicated
ing Manufactured homes being allowed
a will be able to answer your question.
. Mr. Solomon Mishkanian to take the podium.
iejo stated that he has read all the conditions of approval
Chairman O'Neal
Denise Tompkins to take the podium.
Ms. Denise Tompki stated that she lives at 320 Chaney Street and has been there for 22
years. She indicated that Townsend is on a hill and has blind spots and the stop sign is run
about ten to twenty times a day and the right side ofthe road can be seen but not the left. She
was wondering where these driveways were going to be.
Chairman O'Neal asked Engineering Manager Ken Seumalo to answer Ms. Tompkins
question.
....,
AGENDA ITEM NO.---L-
PACE 4: OF ~ \
PAGE 5 - PLANNING CDMMISSION MINUIES -JUNE 20, 2006
r'
Mr. Seumalo stated that site distance is one of the provisions that Engineering looks at and it
will be looked at when the grading is done to make sure that there is sufficient site distance
for entering into the Public Right of Way.
Chairman O'Neal asked Georgia Ratliff to take the podium.
Ms. Ratliff stated that she lives at 26660 Ridgemoore Road, Sun City, 92586. She indicated
that her and her husband wish to build a home right next to these manufactured homes and
she believes this is a Historical District of the City and manufactur homes cannot be built
in the Historical District and that they are concerned about deval their property.
/"""'
Chairman O'Neal asked City Attorney Santana to address
Chairman O'Neal
5 the Historic issue.
Director 0
required
certai
and'& 0
Historic
n eisendanz expressed that since the City is
d homes it requested the builder to be consistent with
ibr continued to explain about craftsman style homes
s ha e craftsman style in order to be consistent with the
this case.
ryone for speaking and brought the discussion back to the dais.
Commissioner Flore ed Ms. Ratliff if the only reason why she opposed these homes were
based on the value f her property and if the property was adjacent to these homes Ms.
Ratliff responded by saying yes it was the main reason and also the Historic District and
added that her property was adjacent to these.
Commissioner Flores asked Mr. Solomon Mishkaninan, if these manufactured homes were
going be placed on a permanent foundation. And what type of material were going to be
/""' used outside of these homes.
AGENDA nEM ~O. \
PAGL2.-OF_~\
PAGE 6 - PLANNING CDMMISSION MINUfES -JUNE 20,2006
Mr. Solomon Mishkaninan responded yes, they were going to be on permanent foundations
and that he was going to use stucco material for the outside.
~
Commissioner Flores added that he has seen these and they are really nice, they almost look
like they were built from the outside.
Mr. Solomon Mishkaninan agreed.
Commissioner Flores stated he had no more comments.
Vice Chairman Gonzales questioned the garage area whic
wondering how high up it was to the top of Townsend. He
was near the top ofthat hill.
Mr. Solomon Mishkaninan explained that the gar
curve, and also it was not right on the road, an
residents will have a place to pull out.
FLORES
TO ADOPT
APPR ING A MINOR
o (2) SINGLE-FAMILY
ED AT 316 & 318
~-105-024).
'-""
5. Residential des eview No. 2005-20 for "Rosetta Hei hts" located southeast of
Hi2hwav 74. eas' of Interstate 15. and east ofthe intersection of Conard Avenue and
Third Street.
Director of Community Development Mr. Preisendanz stated that this is a request for
Residential Design Review No. 2005-20 for Rosetta Heights and requested Project Planner
Carol Donohoe to go over the project with the Commission and answer any questions that
they may have.
,....."
ACENDA ITEM NO._ k
PACE b OF
PAGE 7 -PLANNING COMMISSIONMINlITES -JUNE 20,2006
/""'"'
Planner Donohoe stated that the Planning Commission and the City Council approved
Tentative Tract 31792. At this time she explained the project as follows:
Lennar Homes would like to construct their product on the particular map, including three
detention basins, meandering trails and a tot lot/picnic area. Two neighborhoods are
proposed by Lennar, the Magnolia homes are proposed for the north and east portion of the
tract, and the Primrose homes are proposed for the south and west portions. Construction will
begin simultaneously in both neighborhoods, but construction vehicles can take advantage of
the three points of access to the tract. Diana Lane and Pascali Lane me through the Centex
projects from Rosetta Canyon Drive. Third Street comes from S way 74 through the
Conard Street community.
The Primrose products range in size from 3,
square feet, all in two stories. The three plans all
capacity for either three or four cars, some in tandem sp
uare feet, and 3,399
Uf, three and five
The Magnolia products range in size from 2,904 square
square feet, all in two stories. The three plans offer
bedrooms respectively.
~
Lennar will also have three model horn
are proposed to be constructed on B
parking lot and sales trailer that provides s
accessibility.
three Primrose models
Lane. They will flank a
s, landscaping and handicap
is consistent with and implements the
Map No. 31792. In accordance with
rther environmental documentation was
She
has
and will
has a draft n
project be appro
~dition of Approval that the City Attorney's Office
IS condition number two which is normally included
sinc it was omitted by error. Furthermore, the Commission
tion for this project and it will be filed tomorrow should the
Chairman O'Neal as
he applicant to take the podium.
Project Manager for this project Ellen Michiel, at 40980 County Center Drive, # 110,
Temecula, CA 92591. She said that she agrees with number two of the Conditions of
Approval which has been added, but would like clarification on a couple of others. First
being number twenty one, which requires block walls with tubular steel view fencing on
slopes. Issues have arose with this, one being the proposal of block walls along the Southern
,-..- California Edison easement, with very large structures in that easement, a 20 foot wide paved
access road that allows Edison access to those structures, and that view fencing adjacent to
that easement will not be appropriate. Secondly, on the eastern side of the Lennar site there
AGENDA ITEM NO. \ .
PACE~OF ~ \
PAGE 8 - PLANNING CDMMISSIONMINUfES -JUNE 20,2006
is a school currently under construction and they have indicated that their preference is a
block wall on the top of that slope. We ask that in these two cases the fencing be modified to
exempt these lots from condition number twenty one.
~
Director of Community Development Mr. Preisendanz stated this is the first time this request
has been mentioned and asked Project Planner Donahoe to express her thoughts.
Project Planner Donahoe expressed that it being the first time this was presented to change
the condition; staff has not had the chance to go over them, but did s an issue with it.
Director of Community Developmen
there. Also near the school, what kind 0
ear feet, and was not aware ~
ntacted Centex.
Referencing to the map, Ms. Michiel went over the lot locat'
the change in the block wall with the easement for Edison
Director of Community Development Mr. Preis end
on both sides of the easement, and who will maint .
Ms. Michiel stated that there will be block wa
will maintain the walls and it will be landscaped.
Director of Comm
concerns about thi
Ms. Michi
it to be
did n
ofa
of Occup
Carol and Le
whatever langu
number seventy eight and Lennar would like
s to the original conditions of approval. Although she
. inal condition of approval required the installation
Conard Street prior to the issuance of the Certificate
e sit of this community. She had also spoken with Ken and
tisfied if this condition would be changed to the original with
evelopment Mr. Preisendanz stated that normally the staff would
require time to revie the block wall and it appears in the traffic signal case, our Engineering
Manager Ken Seumalo is approving this request.
Engineering Manager Mr. Seumalo indicated that the standard procedure is to follow the
traffic study recommendation and he is comfortable with it.
Project Planner, Ms. Donahoe stated that she was not comfortable with the block wall request
and would like time to review it and see ifit's feasible.
.....,
ACE"::' i'. Of. \ \ =
PAGE 9 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -JUNE 20,2006
/""'"
Ms. Michiel noted that if this was a case of continuance then they would like to go ahead and
be processed on the same basis but would like to submit and have separately reviewed the
fence and wall plan with the Director approval.
Project Planner Ms. Donahoe expressed if Lennar would like to work with the staff, there
were no issues with her and Director Preisendanz agreed.
Ms. Michiel also agreed and will conform with whatever Director Preisendanz determines is
the best solution.
Chairman O'Neal thanked everyone for speaking
Director of Community Development Mr. Preisendanz assure
will protect the views and the block walls and that fenc'
condition that states all fencing and block walls need to 0
Vice Chairman Gonzales questioned Ms. Mid
going to be connected.
,,-...
Ms. Michiel stated Third Street conn
Lennar will be installing Third Street to
and street lights, and further widening C
turn connects to Central and
t curb gutters, sidewalk
idth with sidewalks.
Ms. Michiel respoq
and wider doors, etc.
1 on Lennar's agreement to work with staff
the block wall.
Ms.
lasted for
correctly. Le
with Carole and the teamwork relationship which has
d e plans on working with Carol to get everything done
rking with the School District and the County with no issues.
Chairman O'Neal
. Michiel to explain what deed restrictions there are?
Ms. Michiel explain that deed restrictions are something that rides with the property and is
recorded as a condition or restriction of approval and limits what can or cannot be done on
the site. A part of the CC & R's indicate that Lennar will record over the property and it has
to be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney and the Planning Department prior to that.
Chairman O'Neal requested further knowledge on deed restrictions on this property with
/""' respect to percentage of resale.
ACENOA ITEM NO. \
PACE ~ _OF ~ \.
PAGE 10 - PLANNING CDMMISSION MINUTES -JUNE 20,2006
Ms. Michiel stated there is a quarter of one percent resale that is donated to the Lennar """'"
foundation which supports supportable housing and shelter housing all over the Country.
Being very active in the Inland Empire, and a major supporter of a number of charitable
programs. Ms Michiel advised of not being certain at the moment if the program is being
implemented with this Community.
Chairman O'Neal confirmed that every person reselling a home will always pay the quarter
percent to Lennar.
Ms. Michiel expressed that it is paid to the foundation. This fo
our buyers at time of purchase and is something that Lennar i
write off and wished more housing development companies
Community Development Director Preisendanz state
of approval the resolution is as is.
MOVED
.,",-",
an O'Neal closed the Public Hearing.
6.
I opened the Public Hearing.
Mr. Preisendanz: is is a Conditional Use Permit to establish a "gasoline dispensing
establishment" with beer and wine sales and a Commercial Design Review for a 7-
ELEVEN" convenience store and gasoline pumps. This item was continued from the June
6th Planning Commission Meeting and is now being heard tonight.
Senior Planner Harris: This is a 2,960 square foot convenience "7-ELEVEN" store, and a
gasoline station consisting of three islands, six pumps, and a canopy. In addition the
applicant is proposing beer and wine sales in the convenience store. The site is located on"""",
ACENDA ITEM NO,....... \
PAOE. \d._OF _ ?--\
PAGE II-PLANNING COMMISSIONMINlITES -JUNE 20,2006
/'"'
the northwest comer of Central and Collier Avenue(s) within the Oak Grove ("Target")
Crossing Shopping Center, Zone (C-2 General Commercial). With regard to project siting,
the applicant proposes the gas pumps and the canopy at the comer ofthe property adjacent to
the street intersection, and the store to be located approximately seventy feet back to the west
and in between is a parking area and a drive aisle. They are also proposing twenty-eight on
site parking spaces. The intersection of Central Ave and Collier, as the Commission is
aware, is quickly becoming one of the City's main Commercial intersections. There is a
variety of shopping centers that are either planned or currently under construction in that
general area. This intersection has become a highly visible area ith a very high traffic
count for the City. Therefore, staff believes a high quality esthef easing site design is
warranted for this project given that high visibility. Also earlier on in the process
informed the applicant that we cannot support a standar tion design which will
consist of gas pumps and hoses and a large pavement fiel canopy right there in
the comer of the site which will become the dom' urthermore, staff
believes the layout, as proposed, does not comply the element of the
General Plan which requires varied building tation, forms of
building to create visual interest. Staff subse ues ce store be
relocated closer to the Collier Avenue frontage and e subseque y relocated to
the interior of the site. The applicant indicated that the d not relocate the gas pumps to
the site interior for three main reasons:
1) Reduced patron visibility
2) Public Safety
3) Site Constraint
~
erned that if you internalize the gas pumps,
"patronage will drop. In taking a look at
te s e on the property to move the pumps and
e s section. In addition, the Shopping Center's
o free standing monument signs on each street frontage
as pump site and makes it very clear that there is a
With regards both the applicants and the City Police Chief, were requesting
that the front d venience store be visible from the intersection of Central and
Collier to reduce t ial for robbery, and to expedite the response from the Police in
such a case, and not the back of the building to the Street. Again, staff upon evaluating
the site, feels strongly that there is adequate room on the site to achieve that visibility and
still internalize the gas pumps.
With regards to site constraints, there are currently CC & R's associated with this Shopping
Center that create a building envelope on the property that limits the siting of the building
and improvements. However once again, staff still maintains there is adequate room to move
~ the improvements as staff envisions and is requesting at this time.
\
AGBiOA ,- NO._ 'l \
pAtiE_ \ \~Of_
PAGE 12 - PLANNING CDMMISSION lvlINUTES -JUNE 20,2006
There are various site design suggestions provided by staff that the applicant was unable or
unwilling to undertake to modify the store floor plan and the gas station as requested,
therefore staff cannot support the site design as proposed. Given the constraints on the site
and general plan requirements that are clear for a high quality development on this high
visibility site, it does raise the question whether a single use would be more appropriate here,
a restaurant or single type of retail use that can more easily fit on this site.
'-'
With regard to building architecture, the applicants are proposing what they call a timeless
contemporary architectural style which will be in keeping with the r ainder of the buildings
within the Shopping Center. The plan is a rectangular floor pI a raised main entry
element and parapet walls with columns that are placed fo . ulation purposes. Staff
initially identified a variety of inconsistencies through the uilding architecture and
the general plan commercial design guidelines and Munic is relates to a lack of
significant building articulation. Also, there is a lac n; with minimum
materials on the building other than stucco and is not enough
landscaping around the building in accordance .
ddress Sta concerns and
ver, today Staff still has some
11, Staff still feels building
umns to achieve strong
ding the lack of roof line
fprovided a decorative trellis
ons. However, looking at the
should b vegetated and they are not at the
. arking spaces on this project site and Staff
a hard look at converting six of those
Qscaping within the parking lot, which to
Municipal Code requires that the building sit
here building entrances are. While the applicant has
till some issues with the latest plans. They have
ont elevation but instead of putting it adjacent to the
lace it on the front of the sidewalk and hence it blocks the
up front the building and you have to walk through the planter
es not work well. Also Staff is concerned that the internal site,
two feet wide or less which does not leave a lot of room for
cannot support building architecture and landscaping as proposed.
'-'
on an IS .
adde
add
building
motorists wh
to get to the sid
landscape planters
planting. Therefore st
Lastly with regards to convenience Beer and Wine sales within the store, the applicants are
requesting that a Type 20 "off site" beer and wine license be issued by the State Department
of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC). In addition, our Municipal Code requires that the
Commission issue a Conditional Use Permit to allow the concurrent selling of both motor
fuel and alcohol on site. Now in evaluating these permits the Commission may consider the
concentration of on site liquor establishments that currently exist within the census tract in
which this site is located as well as looking into the crime rate within that census tract. '-'
ACENDA ITEM MO,... \
PAC&.. ,\ ~,.~~~.\'.--
PAGE 13 -PLANNING m:M:MISSIONMINUfES -JUNE 20,2006
",--.
Upon consultation with ABC, they indicated that there are ten active Type 20 or Type 21 one
business liquor license currently issued within the census tract. In addition, Staff did some
research and has found five other alcohol sales related establishments existing outside the
census tract within a half mile of this site, so there are plenty of other places which are
currently selling beer and wine within close proximity. ABC has indicated a maximum of
three licenses are allowed within a census tract and beyond that it is deemed over
concentrated. Staff indicated that there is currently ten such establishment in this tract, which
is way beyond the limit.
~
.ijct is indeed located
oreover, the Chief has
ages on this property in
and high crime rate
With regard to the crime rate the Police Chief has indicated th
within in area that has been designated as a high crime rate
indicated to staff that he is not in support of the sale of alc
association with this convenience store. Based on the ove
Staff cannot support the proposed use permit for beer
In conclusion, staff is recommending that the C
the gasoline sales establishment, for the (on SI
Commission recommend denial of the Commercial
convenience store and gas station.
ermit for
dition that
to establish a
Chairman O'Neal: Thank you. I have a
Front Street, Suite 207,
EN" representative to address
Equities ' d like to state we made an early
e "7- ELEVEN" in Murrieta, and satisfied
5priateness for a Shopping Center on a
per City Ordinances.
telia Ave, # 350, Anaheim CA 92806. The firm I'm
VEN", the owner of this property has been in
e time now and in this process has been very forward
s. e have representatives from "7- ELEVEN" and ABC
tions you might have.
Unlike the present was shown to you, prior to June 6,2006, we did submit to staff a
revised site plan th e believed/hoped to address their concerns with regards to the
orientation to the p p canopies at the comer with the pumps being further down Collier and
the building closer to the intersection, with additional landscaping buffering on both Streets.
The orientation of the building and getting to this point was the necessity of a lot line
adjustment due to the constrictions of the pad and requirements for the greater center as a
whole.
,,-.. Referencing Power Point Exhibit, this is a better illustration of the building now backing
towards Central A venue, facing out towards the canopy's fuel pump island. Glen referenced
AGENDA iTEM NO. ,
PACE ,':> OF ~ \
* ..,
PAGE 14 - PLANNING CDMMISSION MINUfES -JUNE 20, 2006
the site in Murrieta, and here is a picture of it and it is very similar to what will be put at this
location with the architecture tying in with the Center.
......,
This is the landscape plan as proposed twenty five percent of the project area is landscaped.
Far beyond the 10% that is required. With a number of mature trees on both sides.
A picture of the floor plan for the store, again the prototype of a "7-ELEVEN" store is
something that has been carefully crafted for both efficiency and safety. With the cashier to
be able to see the entire store and the fuel line.
roviders is that
offered,
nts with no
These are the elevations as described, very tastefully done an
the architecture which will be found throughout the Ce
canopy.
We believe what sets "7-ELEVEN" apart from ot
it's a true convenience store. The beer and wi
whereas a liquor store primarily product. "7-E
hard liquor.
half have had their licenses
to minors. The "7-
cy) requires employees to
er and wine retailer in this ......,
the corner of Lake Shore and
. One near a middle school and the last
tial neighborhood. These are some of the
d to note where each one was located
apart from the other retailers by offering to voluntary
'th advertising, signage, display and etc. No video
ed all the liquor stores around the area, isn't there a "7-
is district?
Peter Winngham: Y
t it's not in the census tract.
Chairman O'Neal: Is it a block away from the tract?
Michael Brewer: 41715 Enterprise Circle # 208, Temecula, California. I'm here on behalf
of "7-ELEVEN". I'm their ABC Consultant, and would like to clarify that staff on their
report uses the term onsite and off site sales interchangeably and we would like to make sure
that it's understood that we are proposing an off site for off package retail sale of beer and
wine and it seems to be erroneously recorded in the reports. We are not asking for on site ......,
consumption at the store.
AGENDA iTEM NO._ ~ ==
PAGE...,..) ~ r~OF \ 1
PAGE 15 - PLANNING CDMMISSIONMINlITES -JUNE 20,2006
;'"
Chairman O'Neal: Understood. Mark Haines, is this a copy of the letter you sent me? Is
that correct?
Mark Haines: Yes. 9771 Claremont Masson Blvd, San Diego CA, I'm the Real Estate
Manager for this area. Our team has met with staff and unfortunately what we agreed on and
what we tried to do did not show up on the presentation tonight. We made substantial
changes to the site plan, to the architecture treatments; we turned the building; we made
twenty five percent landscape verses what was required (ten perce . We are the only gas
station on the West side of the free way. You know how im e other side of the
freeway is to get in and out of the Arco off of Dexter. ink we will serve the
Community well by being at the end of the Target Cente esign with the building
turned and pumps set in a right direction, so we should ot deny, as we have
addressed most if not all of staff s questions.
Chairman O'Neal: With no further requests to
start with Commissioner Flores.
e dais and
Commissioner Flores: Listening to
everything that is wrong and that the
you include the picture of"7-ELEVEN'
~
lcture of one of your stores outside of our
own. The other thing is that, was this map
e have or something that was just brought up.
. fied with my staff, we received the site plan via e-mail
We aid not receive landscape plans
Planning Mana
ten days ago. We
building to the come
received it.
is particular graphic on the screen was received approximately
ot in support of this design and it still doesn't achieve getting the
e other issue with the modified elevations and landscaping, I never
Commissioner Flores: So you have not yet reviewed this?
Planning Manager Weiner: That's correct.
~ Director of Community Development Preisendanz: We received this (referencing to llx17
plans delivered to meeting) as a packet.
~ITEMNO._ \
f>AtE \S 'OF _~ \ -.
PAGE 16 - PLANNING CD:M:MISSIONMINUfES -JUNE 20,2006
Planning Manager Weiner: The site plan shown here was received via e-mail.
.....,
Commissioner Flores: I have no more questions.
Chairman O'Neal: Thank you
Vice Chairman Gonzales: First of all there is another gas station on the west side of the free
way. There is an Arco Station by the outlet stores. There are four min-marts and gas stations
in probably a mile of this area and three of them are within less t a half mile. I don't
think we need another one. I agree with Police Chief for the safi at area. The Target
Store and some other restaurants instead. That's it.
ly don't understand.
e of this project".
Chairman O'Neal: Mr. Haines, you used some phrases
Please explain. "Inaccurate pictures of prior discussi
What does that mean? Is this a metiia discussion?
. I n, et-c..
Me.-to..
Mr. Haines: No it's not a meda discussion.
get approval and we felt that their minds were made
could do at the meeting was going to change.
Chairman O'Neal: So when you state
their minds. Is that what you mean?
an, they had made up
~
Mr. Haines: That's the.
architects would have
and the change in
time, before this meeting, our
shows the additional landscaping
Chairman O'Neal:
with that.
ling and mail that to me, I have a problem
Mr.
Chairman one is in a number of places and it's condescending beyond
belief. I ha ad this and they commented on why you were so "whiney".
The problem is our particular concerns but not staffs. In addition to that, prior
to you coming in t one place do you talk about the concern of the Chief of Police of
Lake Elsinore, sayin e did not want another beer and wine sales place in that area. You
know it was there an' did not address it. I received this letter on June 15,2006, which was
yesterday, talking about Conditional Use Permit 2005-23 and Commercial Design review but
you never even addressed the Conditional Use Permit in this letter. I have not heard anything
to refute what staff has recommended, which is a denial. That is the way I will vote. I
recognize Mr. Daigle that there is a significant investment in this and that it's not easy to do
this and not easy to say, but it's what I need to do. We need to talk about procedures Mr.
Preisendanz, because a yes vote is a no vote and a no vote is a yes vote. Because the City is
recommending a denial. Also I would like to inform you that you have the right to appeal ~
this decision if in fact it is not what you want to hear.
AtBtl)~ nna MtL \
'PAGE \-bOf_ ~ \. '-.
.--
PAGE 17 - PLANNING CDMMISSION MINUTES -JUNE 20,2006
"".-
Mr. Daigle: Need a clarification from staff about why they think the solution which is
turned, which puts the canopy away from the comer, makes it not the most dominating visual
thing, is not accomplishing what they are trying to do. All I have heard from Rolfe and Tom
us that it's not enough.
-t-h.e..
Chairman O'Neal: Well it seems to me, what I've heard was is that yettr book that you go by
and the design that you present is design number 23 of "7-ELEVENt" and you are not
interested in changing some of the things staff asked you to chan wi specificity of left
and right, you must know what I'm talking about. pi QY boo f:. .
Mr. Daigle: Not really, because we completely turned t 90 degrees which is
almost exactly what they asked us to do. The only thin . s put the back of the
building to the comer. But the purpose of what they the pump canopy
away from the comer. I have heard that loud an So we put the
pumps as far away as we could from either str hing we
could and we are just trying to understand wh
Guide lines is to get an
ts is to bring the building
e, whereas you wouldn't focus
e are ng to get interest into that comer
arking lot at the comer.
Chairman O'Neal:
then me.
~
. . end : We received the site plan via e-mail but
the hat you have either, in relation to the Design
for us to look at. Weare trying to achieve architecture
ave raised the bar by the request of the Council.
Mr. Daigle: So
comer other than t
hrase Matt's point, it's the lack of something interesting at the
g lot. Or is it that the building has to be in the comer?
ifi'
Director of Communi'ty Development Preisendanz: We can look at different things. But all
staff believes with the General Plan code as Matt has stated. We have opportunities here
where we can work with the design so it does not look like just another gas station. The main
issue is still alcohol.
Mr. Daigle: I did get clarification Chairman O'Neal and the only thing I will say is the only
"".- reason I put in the picture of the Murrieta Store was because that was the one I had looked at.
At1:NOA lTEM NO.,
PAGE \ J OF
\
~ \ -
,
PAGE 18 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUfES -JUNE 20, 2006
Director of Community Development Preisendanz: I wanted to mention that Glen has
worked very hard on other projects and we have a good history with Glen and Oak Grove
Equities and appreciate our relationship. We, staff, look at this objectively in design and hate
to repeat it but need to honor what our Chief of Police is recommending. I understand these
voluntary conditions, which I'm not sure when we received. This is the first time I've seen
those. I would suspect the Police Chief needs to look at that in connection to this project.
""""
Chairman O'Neal: . I would like to direct a letter from Mr. Daigle to Matt Harris, on March
20, 2006, "and request that we do not have another design review b write your staff report
with a deny recommendation and schedule us so that we can our position to the
Planning Commission".
Vice Chairman Gonzales:
beginning.
""""
Chairman O'Neal: Any other comments:
Commissioner Flores: No.
Chairman O'Neal. W
yes vote is a no vot
Permit. Again I want to state, a
Can our City Attorney explain how the
Dep
sta:f1 r
Chairman
such a way a
with staff's reco
staff's recommend
s the resolution, we will need a motion approving
or to deny Conditional Use Permit No 2005-23.
'th a es and a no vote is because the resolution is worded in
ou vote on a motion, a yes vote mean that you are concurring
o deny. A no vote means that you are not concurring with the
eny.
Director of Commu lty Development Preisendanz: First Resolution is number 2006-59.
This is a resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore, California
denying Conditional Use Permit No. 2005-23 for the establishment and operation of a gas
station facility and the concurrent sale of motor vehicle fuel with alcohol beverages located at
Parcel number 377-12-007. It will be appropriate to waive further reading of the resolution
as considered,
Chairman O'Neal requested motion to deny.
""""
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE \ ~
\
OF ~ \
PAGE 19 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUfES -JUNE 20,2006
;--..
2.
MOVED BY GONZALES, SECONDED BY FLORES
AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 3-0, ADOPT
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-59, TO DENY CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT NO. 2005-23 A REQUEST TO ESTABLISH
AND OPERATE A GAS STATION FACILITY WITH
THE CONCURRENT SALE OF MOTOR VEHICLE
FUEL WITH ALCOHOL BEVERAGES LOCATED AT
APN (377-12-007), AND DENIAL OF RESOLUTION NO.
2006-60, FOR COMMERCIAL DESIGN RE W NO.
2005-10 FOR A 7-ELEVEN CONVENIEN ORE
AND AN ASSOCIATED GAS STATION HIN THE
OAK GROVE CROSSING SHOPE ENTER
LOCATED AT APN (377-12-007).
7:40:00 PM Chairman O'Neal closed the Publi
Resolution.
. g of the
BUSINESS ITEMS
r--
INFORMATIONAL
7:40:38 PM Chairm
the Staff Report.
ional Hearing and requested the reading of
1.
. endanz congratulated the two new Commissioners
es has been appointed to a four year term and has been
endoza and Axel Zanelli.
Community Develo nt Director Preisendanz informed Commissioners about the Design
Review Committee (DRC) which brings together Planning, Engineering, Fire, and
Community Services, at the beginning of a project and makes it go faster and smoother.
Senior Planner Matt Harris has instituted an elaborate process which also gets the applicant
involved with all departments and sets forth a "team work" fayade.
;"'"'-
Chairman O'Neal inquired if Mr. Preisendanz was interested in having a Commissioner be a
part of the Committee and stated that after the Commission and all it's new members are on
ACENDA ITIM NO. \
PAGE \~ OF ~\ ....
PAGE 20 - PLANNING COMMISSIONMINlTfES -JUNE 20,2006
board this can be discussed in more detail. The Commission will be more then happy to be a
part of this.
'-'
STAFF COMMENTS
7:4:16 PM Chairman O'Neal asked for Staff Comments.
Planning Manager Tom Weiner took the opportunity to congr
Commissioners and thank the existing Commissioners for th .
Commission for all of their feedback.
e newly appointed
work and thanked the
PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
'-'
lores p nts and added that his experience
City and try to understand the reasons of
tact the staff for questions and concerns,
ation than what is being supplied at the
ill contact the planner presenting the project with
ector Preisendanz added that the staff is trying and will be
ings clear in the staff report especially in such reports.
Chairman O'Neal ed to reiterate about reverse and repeats, to please change the
footprints, recognizi g the four feet in between lot lines and houses is acceptable but that's
minimum and it should be five, and should not be done less then five although it's
acceptable. With a few projections it could have been done easily.
Ken Seumalo updated the Commission on the water line rupture on Rail Road Canyon Road.
Repair to the water line has been completed, but the road repair is yet to be scheduled. Also,
signal construction on Lakeshore Drive is finished and scheduled to be turned on tomorrow.
Finally, the Spring Street drainage repair project will start in a couple of weeks. '-"
ACBmAl~. \
twiE "ole). '- T ~ \ .._
PAGE 21 - PLANNING CD:MMISSIONMINUfES -JUNE 20,2006
,.-...
Chairman O'Neal stated that some place in the San Francisco area, the Sierra Club has won
against a development that had 3900 homes and threatened to sue them unless they agreed to
not put something on the deed that required everybody to pay. Furthermore, Lennar admitted
on the record they charge a quarter percent every time they sell a home. They are allowed to
do that, but it's not right, and the California Association of Realtors is trying to deal with
this.
ADJOURNMENT
Arsi Baron
Office Specialist III
THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, CHAI
THE MEETING AT 7:58:51 PM ON JUNE 20, 2006.
Respectfully Submitted,
,.-...
,.-...
AGENDA ITEM NO. \
PAGE ~ \ Of 1. \
......"
......"
......"
J SIT ~; 2)- 0(,
2"'~ q-/2.-o~
30 days
~W\
S"eeo V1. d
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ReM' .
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION (4
f-fj;c-h'v~. 0 c. + /2; z. 00 c:. .
CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
CovV)c; I
r---
TO:
FROM:
ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ,
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DATE:
AUGUST 1, 2006
PREPARED BY:
TOM WEINER, PLANNING MANAGER
PROJECT TITLE:
ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT NO.
2006-01; A REQUEST TO AMEND PORTIONS OF
LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE (LEMC)
CHAPTER 17.66 (pARKING REQUIREMENTS)
RELATED TO 1) ELIMINATION OF COMPACT
PARKING WITHIN COMMERCIAL AND
INDUSTRIAL ZONES, 2) MODIFYING THE WIDTH
OF 90-DEGREE PARKING DRIVE AISLES, AND 3)
ESTABLISHING A MINIMUM OFF-STREET
PARKING REQUIREMENT FOR MEDICAL USES.
~
APPLICANT:
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, 130 SOUTH MAIN
STREET, LAKE ELSIN9RE, CA 92530
PURPOSE
This report is intended to present information to the Planning Commission in order to
make a recommendation to the City Council of a zoning ordinance text amendment.
The proposed amendment would 1) eliminate compact parking provisions for
commercial and industrial uses and require all parking spaces to be standard full-size
spaces, 2) modify the required width of90-degree parking drive aisles, and 3) establish
a minimum off-street parking requirement for medical uses.
BACKGROUND
,....... The Planning Commission first raised the issue of reviewing compact parking
guidelines in October of 2002. Additionally, there has been some concern regarding
AGENDA ITEM NO. ~
PACE \ OF s '"
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AU~UST 1, 2006
PROJECT TITLE: TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2006-01
~
recently constructed commercial/office developments, which meet current minimum
code requirements but still do not provide optimal vehicle circulation and stall size
within parking areas. These developments include compact spaces and reduced aisle
widths in their design.
Current LEMC requirements for the three (3) separate items related to this proposed
text amendment are as follows:
Compact Parking
LEMC Section 17.66.040 allows for a maximum of 25 percent (25%) of parking
spaces within commercial and industrial developments containing more than 20
parking spaces to be compact in size.
Aisle Width (90 degree parking stall configuration)
LEMC Section 17.66.040 requires a minimum 24-foot wide aisle width.
Parking Requirement for Medical Uses
The LEMC does not indicate a specific parking requirement for medical uses. Medical
uses, such as offices and clinics for medical, dental, and chiropractic businesses are
currently categorized as a general office use (I parking space per 250 square feet of the
building's gross floor area).
~
ANALYSIS
For ease of discussion, each specific text amendment item (compact parking, drive
aisle width, and parking ratio for medical uses) will be discussed separately.
1. COMPACT PARKING
Presence of Trucks and STJort Utility Vehicles
It is generally recognized that compact parking does not work well for uses with high
parking turnover such as retail stores, banks, medical offices, and certain industrial
uses. Many Southern California Municipalities (i.e. Burbank, Pasadena, Culver City,
Hemet) do not allow compact parking for these types of uses.
~
AGENDA,.lTEM ~
P AGE ~ OF 5'1\
~ REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1, 2006
PROJECT TITLE: TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2006-01
The reason most frequently cited by cities for eliminating compact parking is the
increased presence of large vehicles on the road. In Lake Elsinore, larger trucks and
sport utility vehicles become even more prevalent due to the City's proximity to leisure
activities that require towing of recreational items such as boats, watercraft, off-road
vehicles, and motorbikes.
~
Because of recent increases in vehicle fuel prices, it is possible that the number oflarge
trucks or sport utility vehicles on the road may decline in the future. However, as
hybrid and alternative fuel technologies continue to improve, any correlation between
fuel consumption and vehicle size may become increasingly weak. Large and small
vehicles alike are currently using, or are anticipated to use, a number of alternative
fueling methods including hybrid cell technology, changes in fuel efficiencies, methane
and hydrogen for fuel cell vehicles, and electric power. Given that the onset of these
technologies is difficult to predict, staffbelieves that decisions should be made with the
best information available about the vehicles on our roads today. There is a heightened
presence of large vehicles on the road, and those vehicles continue to be purchased,
despite increased fuel costs.
Enforcement of Compact Parking
One of the biggest problems with compact cars is that the average driver does not
know if their car qualifies as compact. The definition of a "compact" vehicle by an
automaker can vary by year, model, body style, or option package. Most cities require
compact spaces to be clearly marked for small vehicles only. However, even with
parking spaces that are clearly marked, few people actually know, or go to the extent of
learning, the width and length of their own vehicle so they may park in a compact
space. Additionally, it is difficult from an enforcement standpoint as the definition of a
true "compact" vehicle becomes subjective.
The use of compact parking has historically been regarded as self-enforcing. Due to
the difficulty of maneuvering a large car into a small space and the risk of "dings and
dents," it was assumed that drivers of large cars would voluntarily avoid compact
spaces. But as detailed above, where small spaces are more conveniently located or
where available parking is limited, drivers of large cars frequently park in a compact
space. Staff from the City of Lake Elsinore's Code Enforcement Division stated that
they do not cite large vehicles parked in compact spaces because there is nothing in the
~
AGENDA~TEM 1
PAGE~OF&
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1, 2006
PROJECT TITLE: TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2006-01
~
LEMC explicitly prohibiting this practice.
Imvacts of Comvact Svaces
Whether or not their vehicle is compact, many drivers are tempted to park their car in a
compact space, especially when the space is in a prime location or if a full-sized space
is unavailable. When a "non-compact" car parks in a compact space, the result is often
that the vehicle encroaches onto the adjoining space; creating a domino effect on the
remaining spaces eventually rendering space(s) unusable.
The more important issue for drivers are the "dings and dents" that often appear when
vehicles abut in compact spaces. In order to avoid these situations, drivers of larger
vehicles, having only compact stalls available to them, may be inclined to park in
unmarked sections of a parking lot adjacent to drive aisles. This in turn, creates
additional impacts throughout parking and circulation areas.
Comvact Parking Regulations in Other Cities
Communities employ an array of methods in their allowance of compact parking, while
some cities prohibit the use of compact stalls altogether. The following matrix reflects
compact parking standards for nearby Inland Empire communities.
~
Hemet
No
Commercial Zones - Only allowed in
excess to nnmmum parking
requirement
Industrial Zones - Up to 40% of
re uired arkin
Compact parking prohibited in
commercial and industrial zones
Corona
Yes
Moreno Valley
No
Parking Ordinance does not give
provisions for compact parking
20% maximum of total number of
provided parking spaces
25 % maximum of total number of
parking spaces
Murrieta
Yes
Ontario
Yes
......,
AGEND1\ ITEM 1-
PAGE !:L OF ~
~ REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1, 2006
PROJECT TITLE: TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2006-01
Perris Yes 40 spaces or less: prohibited
40-800 spaces: 15% compact ok
800+ spaces: 25% compact ok
Rancho Cucamonga No Parking Ordinance does not give
provisions for compact parking
Temecula No Compact parking prohibited in
commercial and industrial zones
Half of the cities surveyed do not allow compact parking. It should be noted however,
that like Lake Elsinore, many of the cities listed above have specific plan areas and
zone overlays incorporated into their zoning and general plan maps, where provisions
for compact parking could theoretically be found.
/"'""'
Lake Elsinore currently allows up to 25 percent (25%) of required parking stalls to be
compact for commercial and industrial uses. This ratio is on the higher end of the
spectrum when compared to the other cities listed in the survey. Of the communities
limiting the proportion of compact spaces, only one (Corona) allows proportions
higher than Lake Elsinore's. This is only for industrial uses however. The proportions
for compact spaces in cities where they are allowed for both commercial and industrial
developments vary from between 15 percent (15%) and 25 percent (25%). If the
Commission feels eliminating provisions for compact parking altogether is not ideal,
an alternative would be to reduce the ratio of compact parking stalls allowed for
commercial and industrial uses.
Alternatives to Eliminatin$! Compact Parkin$!
Compact parking works best in situations where the drivers are regular users of the
facility and are familiar with the parking area and design. For this reason, many cities
allow compact parking only for industrial uses, where many of the drivers are
employees rather than infrequent or one-time users. A small number of communities
specifically allow compact parking for employee-use only. The City of Fullerton limits
compact parking to situations where a separate lot or section of a lot is reserved for
employee-use only. The City of Vista allows 25 percent (25%) of required parking to
be compact and reserved for employee use only. One constraint of this type of
"employee only" compact parking provision is that it is difficult to monitor and enforce
once approved.
".........
AGENDA ITEM ~
PAGE.!2 OF s~
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1, 2006
PROJECT TITLE: TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2006-01
~
Some communities allow for compact parking only when all required parking is first
provided using a non-compact stall size. The Cities of Corona and Oceanside allow for
compact parking in excess of code respectively. Corona however, only allows this
provision for industrial uses.
Compact Parking Analysis Conclusion
Communities have taken a variety of approaches in their use of compact parking. The
increased presence of larger vehicles and driver abuse of compact spaces have led
many cities to prohibit compact spaces altogether. Other cities have elected to allow a
prescribed amount of compact parking stalls for those uses with low parking turnover.
The benefits and disadvantages of compact parking spaces are summarized below:
Benefits
. Maximize land use by consolidating more parking spaces on a single site or
fewer sites.
. Reduce costs of constructing parking areas.
. Regular parking lot user is familiar with the parking design.
....,
Disadvantages
. No enforcement provisions for the use of compact parking on private property.
. Do not work well for high-intensity uses.
· Restricts maneuverability and turning radius of driver.
. Creates more conflicts within drive aisle areas as larger vehicles increase turning
movements to fit in smaller spaces.
. Used by larger vehicles that do not fit in the space or park in more than one
space for convenience.
· Higher potential for damage (dings and dents) to vehicles.
. Difficult to determine the appropriate mix of standard and compact spaces.
As demonstrated by the above lists, staff believes that the disadvantages of compact
parking outnumber the benefits.
As reflected in the proposed draft ordinance (Attachment 2), it is staffs
recommendation that compact parking be prohibited for commercial and industrial ....,
AGENDA, ITEM ~
PAGEfLOF~
r- REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1, 2006
PROJECT TITLE: TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2006-01
uses. Staff believes that compact spaces are not intended to accommodate the design
of vehicles prevalent on the road today. Although some communities have utilized
enforcement strategies to ensure that compact parking is used as intended, staff
believes that enforcement would be difficult and require additional commitment of
Police Department and Code Enforcement resources. The best method of enforcing
compact parking, and deterring automobile damage, is to prohibit the provision
altogether.
Ifthe Planning Commission wishes to seek an alternative to prohibiting compact stalls
altogether, it is staff's assessment that the current permitted ratio of up to 25 percent
(25%) compact spaces should be substantially reduced to no more than 10 percent
(10%) of required spaces. The Commission may further require that compact parking
stalls be utilized by business employees only. However, it is again noted that it can be
extremely difficult to enforce "employee only" compact parking and this approach
would require substantial commitment on the part of both the employee and employer.
Adoption of this provision would apply only to new developments.
r'
2. DRIVE AISLE WIDTH (90 DEGREE PARKING)
As discussed in the compact parking analysis section above, larger vehicles have
become more prevalent. This raises questions in regards to the width of drive aisles and
whether current guidelines are enough to mitigate potential vehicle circulation impacts
within parking areas.
The LEMC currently requires a minimum aisle width of 24-feet for two-way vehicle
drive aisles containing 90-degree parking configurations. For many projects, two-way
drive aisles must be wider than the City's required 24- feet, due to Riverside County
Fire Department regulations. The Uniform Fire Code indicates minimum widths for
fire access roads only and does not expressly list a requirement for drive aisles within
commercial and industrial developments, making consistency between City and Fire
Department standards difficult. For comparison purposes, two-way, 90-degree drive
aisle standards for nearby Inland Empire communities are listed in the following
matrix.
,--
AGEND~TEM 2
PAGE ---L OF ~ "
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1, 2006
PROJECT TITLE: TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2006-01
........,
Corona 25-Feet
Hemet 25-Feet
Moreno Valley 24- Feet
Murrieta 24- Feet
Ontario 26- Feet
Perris 24- Feet
Rancho Cucamonga 24- Feet .....,
Temecula 24- Feet
Five (5) of the eight (8) cities surveyed currently require the same two-way drive aisle
width of24-feet that is currently found in the LEMC. Corona and Hemet require a 25-
foot drive aisle, while Ontario requires 26-feet. It should be noted however, that like
Lake Elsinore, many of the cities listed above have specific plan areas and zone
overlays incorporated into their zoning and general plan maps, where different
provisions for drive aisle widths could theoretically be found. Lake Elsinore's current
requirement of24-foot two-way drive aisles is the lowest in the range of what surveyed
cities require, however, the 24-foot requirement is also the most common.
As reflected in the proposed draft ordinance (Attachment 2), it is staff's
recommendation that two-way drive aisles within 90-degree parking configurations be
increased from 24-feet to 26-feet in width. Staff believes that increasing drive aisle
widths is appropriate in order to accommodate the design of larger sized vehicles
prevalent on the road today. Additionally, increasing the drive aisle width will create
increased consistency with Riverside County Fire regulations, which many times .....,
AGEND~TEM ~
PAGELOFI~
r' REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1, 2006
PROJECT TITLE: TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2006-01
require wider drive aisles than the currently required 24- feet. Adoption of this
provision would apply only to new developments.
3. PARKING REQUIREMENT - MEDICAL USES
The LEMC currently does not have a separate parking ratio designation for medical
uses. Staff has categorized medical uses as office uses, which has a parking
requirement of one (l) space for every 250 square feet of gross floor area (GF A).
Recognizing that medical office uses generate more vehicle trips than a standard
commercial office, staff feels that establishing a more stringent parking ratio for
doctor, dentist, and chiropractic offices is warranted.
For comparison purposes, medical use parking standards for nearby Inland Empire
communities are listed in the following matrix.
r'
Corona 1 space per 200 square feet of GF A
Hemet 1 space per 200 square feet of GF A
Moreno Valley 1 space per 225 square feet of GF A
Murrieta 1 space per 300 square feet ofGFA
Ontario I space per 175 square feet of GF A
Perris I space per 200 square feet of GF A
Rancho Cucamonga I space per 200 square feet of GF A
Temecula 1 space per 300 square feet of GF A
/"'""'
All of the cities surveyed have established a specific parking ratio for medical uses.
AGENDA ITEM ~
PAGES- OF ~'"
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1, 2006
PROJECT TITLE: TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2006-01
.~
Only two (2) of the above cities (Temecula and Murrieta) have a more liberal parking
requirement (1/300) than what Lake Elsinore currently uses (1/250) for medical uses.
A majority of the cities require parking ratios for medical uses at one (l) space per 200
square feet of GF A. Ontario incorporates the most stringent requirement at one (l)
space per 175 square feet ofGF A. It should be noted however, that like Lake Elsinore,
many of the cities listed above have specific plan areas and zone overlays incorporated
into their zoning and general plan maps, where modified provisions for medical use
parking ratios could theoretically be found.
As reflected in the proposed draft ordinance (Attachment 2), staff is recommending
that the Planning commission consider adopting minimum parking requirements for
medical office space at one (1) space for every 175 square feet of GF A. This would
add a clear requirement to the parking ordinance as well as providing additional
parking over general retail and commercial uses.
SUMMARY
'-'
To summarize, the proposed changes to the Parking Ordinance are as follows:
· Eliminate the provision for compact parking.
· Increase the drive aisle width from 24- feet wide to 26- feet wide for drive aisles
within 90-degree parking configurations.
· Establish a parking requirement of one (1) space per 175 square feet of GF A for
medical (doctor, dentist, chiropractic) uses.
The proposed code changes and additional text are reflected in the attached "Draft
Ordinance Revisions" (Attachment 2).
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study was
completed to analyze the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project. The
Initial Study concluded that the proposed project would have no significant 'will'
AGENDA ITEM ~
PAGEhOF~
r' REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1, 2006
PROJECT TITLE: TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2006-01
environmental impacts. A Negative Declaration has accordingly been prepared and
released for review. The review period commenced on July 21, 2006 and ends on
August 10, 2006.
FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed zone text amendment would make minor changes to existing parking
development standards. The changes would not change the overall scope or
complexity of the standards and as such would not require any additional staff time or
resources to administer. There would be no fiscal impact to the City resulting from
administration or enforcement of the proposed ordinance. To the extent that any
future City office projects would have utilized compact parking spaces, there would be
additional cost to the City to develop such a project with full-size spaces. The costs
would vary depending upon the size of the project and the nature of the parking.
r'
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt; Resolution No. 2006-_,
recommending City Council approval of Text Amendment No. 2006-01 in order to
amend portions of LEMC Chapter 17.66 (Parking Requirements) related to; 1)
elimination of compact parking within commercial and industrial zones, 2) modifying
the width of90-degree parking drive aisles, and 3) establishing a minimum off-street
parking requirement for medical uses.
FINDINGS
1. The proposed text amendment to the City's Parking Ordinance will not be
,....-..
a. Detrimental to the health, safety, comfort, or the general welfare of the
persons working or residing within the City in that revisions are proposed
to compact stalls, drive aisle widths, and parking ratio regulations that
will create parking areas with less congestion and better vehicle
circulation that will contribute to the safety and comfort of drivers
traversing these parking areas.
AGENDA ITEM Q
PAGE~OFSTt
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1, 2006
PROJECT TITLE: TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2006-01
......,
b. Injurious to property or improvements within the City because the
proposed amendments to the parking ordinance will create wider parking
spaces and aisle widths that will make parking areas safer and less likely
to create situations where property or existing improvements could be
damaged. Furthermore, the proposed amendments apply to new
developments.
2. The proposed text amendment is consistent with the General Plan as the proposed
changes to the Parking Ordinance will help provide sufficient onsite parking to
accommodate all vehicles associated with the uses found on each site. Furthermore,
the proposed revisions will not inhibit the implementation of appropriate parking
layout and design standards set forth in the Community Design Element of the
General Plan.
PREPARED BY:
TOM WEINER, PLANNING MANAGER
......,
APPROVED BY:
Rolfe M. Preisendanz,
Director of Community Development
ATTACHMENTS:
1. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION
2. DRAFT ORDINANCE REVISIONS
3. NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND INITIAL STUDY
~
AGENDA ITEM ~
PAGE \~OF-s4
r-
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-j3
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF LAKE
ELSINORE APPROVAL OF ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT
AMENDMENT NO. 2006-01 AND THE ADOPTION OF THE
NEGATIVE DECLARATION THEREFORE
WHEREAS, an application has been initiated by the City of Lake Elsinore
amending portions of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) Chapter 17.66
(Parking Requirements), related to 1) eliminating compact parking provisions for
commercial and industrial uses and instead requiring all parking spaces to be
standard full-size spaces, 2) modifying the required width of 90-degree parking
drive aisles, and 3) establishing a minimum off-street parking requirement for
medical uses; and
,-.. WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project
pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) Section 15070, describing the reasons that the proposed text
amendments will not have a significant effect on the environment and do not
require the preparation of an environmental impact report; and
WHEREAS, Section 17.84.050 of the LEMC stipulates that the Planning
Commission render its recommendation on a Zoning Ordinance text amendment,
including the reasons for the recommendation, to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, public notice of the application has been given, and the
Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community
Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with
respect to this item on August 1, 2006.
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 proposed
Zoning Ordinance text amendment. The Planning Commission finds and
determines that an Initial Study was completed to analyze the potential
AGENDA'TEM NO.
PACE \~
~
OF S~
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
PAGE20F3
.......
, '
environmental impacts of the proposed project. The Initial Study concluded that '-'
the proposed project would have no significant environmental impacts.
SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning law and
the LEMC, the Planning Commission makes the following findings for the
recommendation of approval of Text Amendment No. 2006-01:
1. The proposed text amendment to the City's Parking Ordinance will:
a. Not be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort, or the general
welfare of the persons working or residing within the City in that
revisions are proposed to compact stalls, drive aisle widths, and
parking ratio regulations that will create parking areas with less
congestion and better vehicle circulation that will contribute to the
safety and comfort of drivers traversing these parking areas. .
b. Not be injurious to property or improvements within the City because
the proposed amendments to the parking ordinance will create wider
parking spaces and aisle widths that will make parking areas safer
and less likely to create situations where property or existing
improvements could be damaged. Furthermore, the proposed
amendments apply to new developments.
~
2. The proposed text amendment is consistent with the General Plan as the
proposed changes to the Parking Ordinance will help provide sufficient onsite
parking to accommodate all vehicles associated with the uses found on each
site. Furthermore, the proposed revisions will not inhibit the implementation of
appropriate parking layout and design standards set forth in the Community
Design Element of the General Plan.
SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its
passage and adoption.
......"
ACENDA ITEM NO. ~
PAOE \4: OF s '--\
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-_
PAGE30F3
r--
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this first day of August, 2006,
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
Michael O'Neal, Chairman
City of Lake Elsinore
ATTEST:
r--
Rolfe Preisendanz
Director of Community Development
,--.
AtENDA ITEM NO. ~
PACE \S OF S\
~
ATTACHMENT 2
"DRAFT ORDINANCE REVISIONS"
Compact Parking and Aisle Width (Revise Existing Code)
17.66.040 Size of parking spaces and required aisle width
A. Parking spaces shall have the following minimum clear dimensions
and aisle width as indicated below:
Space (in feet)
District Width(l) Length(2)
Residential-covered 10 . 20
Residential-uncovered 9 18
Industrial-Commercial 9 18
Industrial Commercial( 4)
Compact & #
Recreational Vehicle 10 30
Parallel Spaces 8 23
Aisle Width (in feet)
30 45 60 90
28
12 15 18 ~ 26
12 15 18 ~ 26
.....,
+2.# +& ~
15 18 21 28
(1) Open or uncovered spaces with sides abutting a wall, building,
fence, or other obstruction shall be two-feet (2') wider than the standard
required width.
(2) Parking space length may include a two (2) foot allowance for
vehicle overhang of a landscaped area.
(3) The required dimensions of a garage or carport shall be measured
from the interior of the garage or carport.
(1) f.. maximum of twenty fi'le percent (25~{') of the total number of
parking spaces, in commercial and industrial developments of more than
twenty (20) parking spaces may be compact spaces. Compact spaces me not
permitted in residential de"/elopments. Compact spaces shall be grouped
together in logical blocks, equally distributed throughout a parking lot, ~
AGENDA ITEM ~O. ~
PACE 1-& OF 54.
",.-
",.-
",.-
subject to the approval of the Cormnunity Development Director, and shall
be clearly marked "Compact Cars Only."
(5) For multi-car garages or carports, the minimum width for parking
stalls shall be nine and one-half (9-1/2') feet.
Medical Use Parkinf! Requirement (Add New Subsection)
17.66.030 Number of parking spaces required
16. Medical uses (including offices for doctors, dentists, and
chiropractors) one (1) space for each 175 square feet of gross floor area.
-End Draft Ordinance Revisions-
AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ .
PAGE \1 OF ~~
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
130 South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
(951) 674-3124 Voice (951) 471-1419 Fax
"'-'"
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Project Entitlement No(s): Zonina Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
Applicant: City of Lake Elsinore
Address: 130 S. Main Street Lake Elsinore. CA 92530
Project location: Citywide in the Commercial and Industrial Zones
Project Description: A reauest to amend portions of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Chapter 17.66
(Parkina Reauirements) related to 1) Elimination of compact parkina stalls within commercial and
industrial zones: 2) Modifvina the width of drive aisles within 90-dearee parkina confiaurations: and
3) Establishina a minimum off-street parkina reauirement for medical offices.
Based on the attached Initial Study prepared for this project, the City of Lake Elsinore has determined that
there would be no significant, adverse, effect on the environment due to the scope of the project. All other "'-'"
materials that constitute the basis upon for determining to adopt this Negative Declaration are available for
public review at the City of Lake Elsinore Planning Division, 130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA
92530. This document constitutes a Negative Declaration.
RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES (i.e., any agency that has discretionary approval power over the project):
City of Lake Elsinore
TRUSTEE AGENCIES (i.e., the California Department of Fish and Game, State lands Commission,
State Department of Parks and Recreation, and University of California):
None
Notice Pursuant to Section 21092.5 of the Public Resources Code:
A public hearing before the Planning Commission will be held on August 1, 2006 at 6:00 p.m. at the City of
Lake Elsinore Cultural Center, 183 North Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 to consider this project. At
that time, all interested parties are welcome to address the Planning Commission on this matter.
Prior to the public hearing, the public is invited to submit written comments on the proposed Negative
Declaration to the Planning Division, attention Tom Weiner, Planning Manager, 130 South Main Street,
La Elsinore, CA 92530 or phone (951) 674-3124.
Julv 20. 2006
Date
"'-'"
Tom Weiner, Planning Manager
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE \ ~
~
OF 54
",..--
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
130 South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
(951) 674-3124 Voice (951) 471-1419 Fax
INITIAL STUDY
City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
Introduction
This Initial Study has been prepared in accordance with relevant provisions of the California
",..-- Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended, and the CEQA Guidelines. Section 15063(c)
ofthe CEQA Guidelines indicates that the purposes of an Initial Study are to:
1. Provide the Lead Agency (i.e., the City of Lake Elsinore) with information to use as the basis for
deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or Negative Declaration;
2. Enable an applicant or Lead Agency to modify a project, mitigating adverse impacts before an EIR
is prepared, thereby enabling the project to quality for a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative
Declaration ;
3. Assist the preparation of an EIR, if one is required, by:
· Focusing the EIR on the effects determined to be significant;
· Identifying the effects determined not to be significant;
· Explaining the reasons why potentially significant effects would not be significant;
and
· Identifying whether a program EIR, tiering, or another appropriate process can be
used for analysis of the project's environmental effects;
4. Facilitate environmental assessment early in the design of a project;
5. Provide documentation of the factual basis for the findings in a Negative Declaration or Mitigated
Negative Declaration that a project will not have a significant effect on the environment;
",..--
6. Eliminate unnecessary EIRs; and
7. Determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the project.
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE \~
~
OF 54
City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
'-'
INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Title:
Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2006-01
2. Lead Al!encv Name and Address:
City of Lake Elsinore
130 South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, California 92530
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Tom Weiner, Planning Manager
(951) 674-3124
4. Project Location:
Citywide in all Commercial and Residential Zones
5. Project Applicant Name and Address:
City of Lake Elsinore
130 South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
......,
6. General Plan Desil!nation(s):
Mixed Use, Neighborhood Commercial, General Commercial, Tourist Commercial, Commercial
Office, Freeway Business, Business Park, and Limited Industrial
7. Zoninl!:
C-I (Neighborhood Commercial), C-2 (General Commercial, CM (Commercial Manufacturing),
CO (Commercial Office), CP (Commercial Park), M-l (Limited Manufacturing), and M-2
(General Manufacturing).
8. Description of Proiect:
To amend portions of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Chapter 17.66 (Parking Requirements)
related to:
1. Elimination of compact parking stalls within commercial and industrial zones.
2. Modifying the width of drive aisles within 90-degree parking configurations.
3. Establishing a minimum off-street parking requirement for medical uses.
9. Surroundinl! Land Uses and Settinl!:
Varies by location as Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01 applies Citywide to all '-'
properties in Commercial and Industrial zones.
AGENDA ITEM NO. ~
1\1\,.1: -&0 OF 5~
,-- City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
10. Other a2eocies whose auuroval is required (e.2.. uermits. fioaocio2 auuroval. or
uarticiuatio2 a2reemeot):
None.
/""
/""
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE 'On
:J.
OF S~
City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
.......,
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one
impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
D Aesthetics D Agricultural Resources D Air Quality
D Biological Resources D Cultural Resources D Geology/Soils
D Hazards & Hazardous Materials D Hydrology/Water Quality D Land Use/Planning
D Mineral Resources D Noise D Population/Housing
D Public Services D Recreation D Transportationffraffic
D Utilities/Service Systems D Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
r8J I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a
NEGATNE DECLARATION will be prepared.
D I find that although the project could have a significant effect on the environment there will not be a
significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made or agreed to by the
project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
D I find that the proposed project MA Y have a significant effect on the environment and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
D I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect l) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that
remain to be addressed.
D I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because
all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or
NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or
mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATNE DECLARATION, including revisions or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
.....,
Signature
July 20, 2006
Date
Tom Weiner
Print Name
Planning Manager, City of Lake Elsinore
Title
"'-"
AGENDA ITEM NO. ~
PACE ~~ OF 5~
..---. City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT EVALUATION CHECKLIST
.---
1. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the
impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault
rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors
as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a
project-specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site,
cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational
impacts.
3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist
answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation,
or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence
that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when
the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the
incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a
"Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly
explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from "Earlier
Analyses," cited in support of conclusions reached in other sections may be cross-referenced).
5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an
effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D).
In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a. Earlier Analysis Used-Identify and state where they are available for review.
b. Impacts Adequately Addressed-Identify which effects from the above checklist were
within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based
on the earlier analysis.
c. Mitigation Measures-For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures
Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from
the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the
project.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for
potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside
document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is
substantiated.
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals
contacted should be cited in the discussion.
.---
8. The explanation of each issue should identity: a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to
evaluate each question; and b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less
than significance.
AGENDA ITEM NO. ~
PACE Q.~ OF 5~
City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
......,
A. AESTHETICS
Would the project:
1. Have a substantial
vista?
adverse effect on a scemc
2. Substantially damage scenic resources, including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?)
3. Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of the site and its
surroundings?)
4. Create a source of substantial light or glare,
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
B. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES*
Would the project:
5. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland,
or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use?
6. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use, or a Williamson Act contract?
7. Involve other changes III the existing
environment, which, due to their location or
nature, could result III converSIOn of
Farmland, to nonagricultural use?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
D
D
D
Less than
Significant No Impact
Impact
D ~
D
~
..."
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects. lead agencies may refer to the
California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of
Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agricultural and farmland.
*
D
~
D
~
Less than
Significant No Impact
Impact
D ~
D ~
D ~
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACe ~ ~
......,
J.
OF j~
,.-.. City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
C. AIR QUALITY*
Would the project:
8. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
9. Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation?
10. Result III a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project regton IS non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard (including releasing emissions which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
II. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?)
",-- 12. Create objectionable odors affecting a
substantial number of people?)
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
D
D
D
D
D
Less than
Significant No Impact
Impact
D
~
D
~
D
~
D
D
~
~
*
Where available, the significant criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district
may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
13. Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on
any speCIes identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by
the California Department of Fish and Game
or u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service?
14. Have a substantial adverse effect on any
npanan habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified III local or regional
plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or
u.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
~
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
D
D
Less than
Significant No Impact
Impact
D ~
D ~
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE ~S
~
OF S '"
City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
'-'
D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
15. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
16. Interfere substantially with the movement of
any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
17. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
18. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant No Impact
Impact
D
D
D [Z]
D
D
D [Z]
D
D
D [Z]
.....,
D
D
D [Z]
E. CULTURAL RESOURCES Potentially Less Than Less than
Significant Significant Significant No Impact
Would the project: Impact With Impact
Mitigation
19. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined D D D ~
in ~ 15064.5?
20. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource D D D [Z]
pursuant to ~15064.5?
21. Directly or indirectly destroy a umque
paleontological resource or site or umque D D D ~
geological feature?
22. Disturb any human remains, including those D D D ~
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
.....,
AGENDA ITEM NO. ~
PAGE ~-b OF 54
~ City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
F. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:
23. Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk
ofloss, injury, or death involving:
a. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special Pub. 42.
b. Strong seismic ground shaking?
c. Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
d. Landslides?
----
24. Result in substantial soil erosion, or the loss of
topsoil?
25. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in
on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse
26. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-I-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial risks to life or
property?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
27. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative waste
water disposal system where sewers are not D
available for the disposal of waste water?
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
Less than
Significant No Impact
Impact
D ~
D ~
D ~
D ~
D ~
D ~
D ~
D
~
G.HAZARDSANDHAZARDOUS
MATERIALS
~
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant No Impact
Impact
ACENDA ITEM NO.
PACE ~l
~
OF .5~
City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
G.HAZARDSANDHAZARDOUS
MATERIALS
Would the project:
28. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use
or disposal of hazardous materials?
29. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
up-set and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
30. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one-quarter mile of an existing
or proposed school?
31. Be located on a site which is included on a list
of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
32. For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport
or public use airport, would the project result
in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
33 For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the
project area?
34. Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan?
35. Expose people or structures to a significant
risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland
fires, including where wildlands are adjacent
to urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
'will'
Less than
Significant No Impact
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
~
~
~
~
.....,
~
~
~
~
'will'
ACENOA ITEM NO. ~
PAGE ~~ OF S~
,,-...City of Lake Elsinore
?:oning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
H. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Potentially Less Than Less than
Significant Significant Significant No Impact
With
Would the project: Impact Mitigation Impact
36. Violate any water quality standards or waste D D D ~
discharge requirements?
37. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net deficit
in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local D D D ~
groundwater table level (e.g., the production
rate of preexisting nearby wells would drop to
a level which would not support existing land
uses or planned uses for which permits have
been granted)?
38. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern
,,-... of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river, or D D D ~
substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result
in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
39. Create or contribute runoff water, which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm D D D ~
water drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
40. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? D D D ~
41. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard
area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard D D D ~
Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other
flood hazard delineation map?
42. Place within a lOO-year flood hazard area
structures which would impede or redirect flood D D D ~
flows?
43. Expose people or structures to a significant risk
of loss, injury or death involving flooding, D D D ~
including flooding as a result of the failure of a
~ levee or dam?
44. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? D D D ~
AGENDA ITEM NO. ~
PAGE ~~ Of A S4
City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
.......",
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
D
Less than
Significant No Impact
Impact
Would the project:
45. Physically divide an established community?
46. Conflict with any applicable land use plan,
policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but not
limited to the general plan, specific plan, local D
coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
47. Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural community D
conservation plan?
D
D ~
D
D
~
D
D
~
J. MINERAL RESOURCES Potentially Less Than Less than
Significant Significant Significant No Impact ......,
Would the project: Impact With Impact
Mitigation
48. Result in the loss of availability of a known D D D ~
mineral resource that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state?
49. Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site D D D ~
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan
or other land use plan?
K. NOISE
Would the project result in:
50. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise
levels in excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
51. Exposure of persons to or generation of
excessive groundbome vibration or D
groundbome noise levels?
Potentially Less Than Less than
Significant
Significant With Significant No Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
D D D ~
D
D
~
.......,
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE 30 OF
~
S4
r-- City of Lake Elsinore
loning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
K. NOISE Potentially Less Than Less than
Significant Significant Significant No Impact
With
Would the project result in: Impact Mitigation Impact
52. A substantial permanent increase in ambient D D D ~
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels
existing without the project?
53. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in D D D ~
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels without the project?
54. For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public D D D ~
use airport, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
55. For a project located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip, would the project expose people D D D ~
residing or working in the project area to
,,-, excessive noise levels?
L. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant No Impact
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Would the project:
56. Induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through an extension of roads or other
infra-structure)?
57. Displace substantial numbers of existing
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
58. Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
D
D
D ~
D
D
D ~
D
D ~
D
".--.
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE '3 \
~
OF .3~
City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01 ""-tIIf
July 20, 2006
M. PUBLIC SERVICES* Less Than
Potentially Significant Less than
Would the project result in substantial adverse Significant With Significant No Impact
physical impacts to the following: Impact Mitigation Impact
59. Fire protection? D D D ~
60. Police protection? D D D ~
61. Schools? D D D ~
62. Parks? D D D ~
63. Other public facilities? D D D ~
*
Include potential effects associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the public services.
N.
RECREATION
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant No Impact
Impact
64. Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
65. Does the project include recreational facilities
or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities, which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
""-tIIf
D
D
D
~
D
D
D
~
O. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant No Impact
Impact
Would the project:
66. Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial
in relation to the existing traffic load and
capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a
substantial increase in either the number of
vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on
roads, or congestion at intersections)?
D
D
D ~
,....,
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE 3~ OF
~
5'-'
".-- City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
O. TRANSPORTATIONffRAFFIC
Would the project:
67. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a
level of service standard established by the
County congestion management agency for
designated roads or highways?
68. Result in a change in traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
69. Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
70. Result in inadequate emergency access?
71. Result in inadequate parking capacity?
~. 72. Conflict with adopted policies, plans or
programs supporting alternative transportation
(e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
D
D
D
D
D
D
Less than
Significant No Impact
Impact
D ~
D ~
D ~
D ~
D ~
D ~
P. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Would the project:
73. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of
the applicable Regional Water Quality Control
Board?
74. Require or result in the construction of new
water or wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the construction D
of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
,,--.,
75. Require or result in the construction of new
storm water drainage facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental effects?
76. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the project from existing entitlements and
resources, or are new or expanded entitlements
needed?
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
D
D
D
D
Less than
Significant No Impact
Impact
D ~
D
~
D
~
D
~
AaENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE 33
~
of S~
City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01 "-"
July 20, 2006
P. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Less Than
Potentially Significant Less than
Significant With Significant No Impact
Would the project: Impact Mitigation Impact
77. Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider, which serves or may serve D D D ~
the project that it has adequate capacity to serve
the project's projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
78. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted D D D ~
capacity to accommodate the project's solid
waste disposal needs?
79. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes D D D ~
and regulations related to solid waste?
Q. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE
80. Does the project have the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self-sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce
the number or restrict the range of rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
81. Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project
are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of
other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects)?
82. Does the project have environmental effects,
which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant No Impact
Impact
......"
D
D
D
~
D
D
D
~
D
D
D
~
"-"
-End of Environmental Impact Evaluation Checklist-
~ENDA ITEM NO. ~
PACE 34 OF S~
,-- City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT EVALUATION DISCUSSION
The following is a discussion of the potential impacts associated with the approval of the proposed
project, as identified in the above Environmental Impact Evaluation Checklist. Explanations are
provided for each item below.
A. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
1) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
No Impact: The project proposes an amendment to portions of the City's Parking Ordinance
only. The project will have no impact to any scenic resources
Mitigation Measures: None.
2) Substantially damaf!e scenic resources. includinf!. but not limited to. trees. rock outcroooings.
and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
,--
No Impact: The project proposes an amendment to the City's Parking Ordinance only. The
project will have no impact to any scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings and historic buildings within a scenic highway.
Mitigation Measures: None.
3) Substantially de$!rade the existinf! visual character or quality of the site and its surroundinf!s?
No Impact: The proposed text amendment involves no physical development and is limited to
modifying parking standards outlined in the City's Municipal Code. Therefore, the project will
not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of a site and its surroundings,
and the project will have no impacts.
Mitigation Measures: None.
4) Create a new source of substantiallif!ht or f!lare which would adversely affect day or nif!httime
views in the area?
No Impact: Please refer to A-3 above.
~
Mitigation Measures: None.
ACENDA ITEM NO.
PACE '3S
~
OF .J~
City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
......,
B. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California
Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the
California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on
agriculture and farmland. Would the project:
5) Convert Prime Farmland. Unique Farmland. or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland).
as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mappinf! and Monitoring Prof!Tam of
the California Resources Af!encv. to non-af!Ticultural use?
No Impact: The proposed project involves amending the City's Parking Ordinance. Therefore,
no relationship exists between the project and the conversion of farmland to urban uses.
Mitigation Measures: None.
6) Conflict with existinf! zoninf! for agricultural use. or a Williamson Act contract?
No Impact: Refer to response to B-5 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
......,
7) Involve other chanf!es in the existinf! environment. which due to their location or nature. could
result in the conversion of Farmland. to non-af!ricultural use?
No Impact: Refer to response B-5 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
C. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air
quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project:
8) Conflict with or obstruct imvlementation of the apvlicable air qualitv vlan?
No Impact. The project would have a citywide impact on parking standards in the City's
Municipal Code. The project would not change existing land uses contained in the City's
General Plan or have any direct impacts on local air quality.
Mitigation Measures: None.
......,
AGENDA ITEM NO.
".,... ?..L
~
'" t.
/""'" City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
9) Violate any air Quality standard or contribute substantially to an existinJ! or pro;ected air
quality violation?
No Impact: Refer to response C-8 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
10) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the pro;ect
region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air Quality standard
(includinJ! releasinJ! emissions which exceed Quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
No Impact: Refer to response C-8 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
11) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
/""'" No Impact: Refer to response C-8 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
12) Create ob;ectionable odors affecting a substantial number ofpeople?
No Impact: Refer to response C-8 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
D.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
13)
Have a substantial adverse effect. either directly or throuJ!h habitat modifications. on any
species identified as 'a candidate. sensitive. or special status species in local or ref!ional plans.
policies. or reJ!Ulations. or bv the California Department of Fish and Game or us. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
/"'""'
No Impact: The proposed project is a regulatory change to sections of the City's Parking
Ordinance contained in the Municipal Code and will have no impact on any property, nor
impact any sensitive plant or animal habitat. Likewise, there will be no conflict between the
project and any adopted city, county, regional, state or federal policy, goal, or plan pertaining to
the preservation and/or conservation of biological resources in the City of Lake Elsinore.
Mitigation Measures: None.
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE '31
~
OF_~'-\___
City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
.....,
14) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional vlans. volicies. ref!Ulations or by the California Department of
Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact: Refer to response D-13 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
15) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally vrotected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (including. but not limited to. marsh. vernal pool. coastal. etc.) throuf!h
direct removal. filling. hydrolof!ical interruvtion. or other means?
No Impact: Refer to response D-13 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
16)
Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors. or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
.....,
No Impact: Refer to response D-13 above.
.
Mitigation Measures: None.
17) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. such as a tree
lJreservation policy or ordinance?
No Impact: Refer to response D-13 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
18) Conflict with the vrovisions of an adoTJted Habitat Conservation Plan. Natural Communitv
Conservation Plan. or other avvroved local. ref!ional. or state habitat conservation vlan?
No Impact: Refer to response D-13 above.
Mitigation Measures: None
.....,
AOENDA ITEM~O. ~
PACE 3<s OF 54
,,-.. City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
E. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
19) Cause a substantial adverse chanJ!e in the significance of a historical resource as defined in
CEQA Guidelines Q15064.5?
No Impact: The text amendment to the City's Parking Ordinance involves no physical land use
changes in the City of Lake Elsinore. Therefore, the project would have no impact on cultural
resources.
Mitigation Measures: None.
20) Cause a substantial adverse chanJ!e in the siJ!nificance of an archaeoloJ!ical resource pursuant
to CEOA Guidelines Q15064.5?
No Impact: Refer to response E-19 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
,......
21) Directly or indirectly destroy a uniQue paleontoloJ!ical resource or site or uniQue J!eologic
feature?
No Impact: Refer to response E-19 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
22) Disturb any human remains. including those interred outside offormal cemeteries?
No Impact: Refer to response E-19 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
F; GEOLOGY AND SOILS.
Would the project:
23)
Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects. includinJ! the risk of loss.
in;urv. or death involving:
,......
AGENDA ITEM NO. ~
PAGE ~'\ Of 5~
.."
City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
"-tJIf
a.) Ruoture of a known earthQuake fault. as delineated on the most recent AlQuist-Priolo
EarthQuake Fault Zoning Mao issued bv the State Geoloflist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geolow Soecial
Publication 42.
No Impact: The proposed amendment would make minor adjustments to the City's existing
parking standards found in the City's Municipal Code. There are no associated physical
changes in land use proposed at this time that would cause impacts related to geology and
soils. Therefore, the proposed project would have no potential for geology or soils related
impacts.
Mitigation Measures: None.
b.) Stronfl seismic ground shaking?
No Impact: Refer to response F-23 (a) above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
"-tJIf
c.) Seismic-related flround failure. including liQuefaction?
No Impact: Refer to response F-23 (a) above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
d.) Landslides?
No Impact: Refer to response F-23 (a) above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
24) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of too soil?
No Impact. Refer to response F-23 (a) above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
25)
Be located on a fleoloflic unit or soil that is unstable. or would become unstable as a result of
the pro;ect. and ootentiallv result in on- or off-site landslide. lateral soreadinfl. subsidence.
liQuefaction or collaose?
"-tJIf
AGENDA tttM NO. d-.
PAGE 40 OF Sl.\.
r-- City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
No Impact: Refer to responses F-23 (a).
Mitigation Measures: None.
26) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Buildimz Code (1994).
creatinJ! substantial risks to life or property?
No Impact: Refer to response F-23 (a) above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
27) Have soils incapable of adeQuately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water
disposal system where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
No Impact: Refer to response F-23 (a) above.
~
Mitigation Measures: None.
G. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
28) Create a siJ!nificant hazard to the public or the environment throuJ!h the routine transport, use,
or disposal of hazardous materials?
No Impact: The proposed amendment to the Parking Ordinance contained in the City's
Municipal Code in no way involves or affects the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials. Therefore, the project would have no impacts.
Mitigation Measures: None.
29) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonablv foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involvinJ! the release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
No Impact: Refer to response G-28 above.
~
Mitigation Measures: None.
30)
Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials. substances. or
waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
ACENDA ITEM NO. ~
PACE_~~Y\~ OF S~
City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
-.....III
No Impact: Refer to response G-28 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
31) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant
to Government Code Section 65962.5 and. as a result. would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
No Impact: The proposed project would amend the City's existing Parking Ordinance standards
found in the Municipal Code. The proposed adjustments would be applied citywide in
commercial and industrial areas and do not inv<?lve any specific development. Therefore, no
impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: None.
32) For a project located within an airport land use plan or. where such a plan has not been
adoTJted. within two miles of a public airport or public use aimort. would the project result in a
safety hazard for people residinf! or workinf! in the project area? -.....III
No Impact: Refer to response G-31 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
33) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip. would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residinf! or workinf! in the project area?
No Impact: Refer to response G-31 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
34) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adoTJted emergency response plan or
emerf!encv evacuation plan?
No Impact: Refer to response G-31 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
......,.
AGENDA fltM NO. ~
PAOE 4~ OF__~~
~ City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
35) Expose people or structures to a Sifmificant risk of loss. in;urv or death involving wildland fires.
inc/udinf! where wildlands are ad;acent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed
with wildlands?
No Impact: Refer to response G-31 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
H. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
36) Violate any water Quality standards or waste discharf!e reQuirements?
No' Impact: The proposed project would amend the City's existing Parking Ordinance standards
found in the Municipal Code. The proposed adjustments would have no effect on hydrology or
water quality in the City of Lake Elsinore. Therefore, no impacts would occur.
~
Mitigation Measures: None.
37) Substantially deplete f!roundwater supplies or interfere substantially with $!roundwater recharf!e
such that there would be a net deficit in aQuifer volume or a lowerinf! of the local $!roundwater
table level (e.f!.. the production rate of pre-existinf! nearby wells would drop to a level which
would not support existinf! land uses or planned uses for which permits have been $!ranted)?
No Impact: Refer to response H-36 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
38) Substantially alter the existing drainaf!e pattern of the site or area. inc/udinf! throuf!h the
alteration of the course of stream or river. or substantially increase the rate or amount of the
surface runoff in a manner. which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
No Impact: Refer to response H-36 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
39) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existinf! or planned storm
water drainaf!e systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runof]?
,"--
No Impact: Refer to response H-36 above.
AGENDA ITEM NO. ~
PACE t() OF S~
City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
~
Mitigation Measures: None.
40) Otherwise substantially def!rade water auality?
No Impact: Refer to response H-36 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
41) Place housinf! within a 100-Year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard
Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map?
No Impact: Refer to response H-36 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
42) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood
flows?
~
No Impact: Refer to response H-36 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
43) Expose people or structures to a sif!nificant risk of loss. injury or death involvinf! floodinf!.
inc/udinf! floodinf! as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
No Impact: Refer to response H-36 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
44) Inundation by seiche. tsunami. or mudflow?
No Impact: Refer to response H-36 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
45) Physically divide an established community?
~
.... """..
" \.
~
c:::.L\
ACENDA ITEM NO.
^""
/"" City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
No Impact: The proposed Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment is related to parking guidelines
for commercial and industrial development. It does not involve permanent or physical separation
of the community. Therefore, the proposed text amendment would have no associated impacts.
Mitigation Measures: None
46) Conflict with any applicable land use plan. policy. or regulation of an m!encv with jurisdiction
oyer the project (including. but not limited to the I!eneral plan. specific plan. local coastal
prOf!ram. or zoning ordinance) adopted for the pUYTJose of avoidinI! or mitigatim! an
environmental effect?
No Impact: The proposed Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment modifies sections of existing
Municipal Code parking guidelin~s. Therefore the proposed amendment would have no impact
to any plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect.
Mitigation Measures: None.
~
47) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation
plan?
No Impact: Refer to response D-13 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
J. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
48) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the
ref!ion and the residents of the state?
No Impact: The proposed Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment is related to parking
requirements for commercial and industrial development. Therefore, no alternation or loss of a
known mineral resource would occur.
Mitigation Measures: None.
49) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated
__ on a local general plan. specific plan or other land use plan?
No Impact: Refer to response J-48 above.
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE. 4s
~
OF 54
City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
......,
Mitigation Measures: None.
K. NOISE. Would the project result in:
50) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the
local f!eneralplan or noise ordinance. or applicable standards of other af!encies?
No Impact: The proposed Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment will not expose persons to the
generation of excess noise levels, ground borne vibration, or increase ambient noise in the City
of Lake Elsinore. The amendment does not involve any development that would impact noise
levels in the City. The proposed amendment does not alter any noise-related regulations found
in the Municipal Code or General Plan and would not lead to a change in the generation of
noise. Therefore, no impact to noise levels would occur.
Mitigation Measures: None.
51) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise ~
levels?
No Impact: Refer to response H-50
Mitigation Measures: None.
52) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the pro;ect vicinity above levels
existinf! without the pro;ect?
No Impact: Refer to response H-50 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
53) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the pro;ect vicinity
above levels existing without the pro;ect?
No Impact: Refer to response H-50 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
"-'
~NDA ITEM NO. ~
PAcL-4 b OF Sl.
,r- City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
54) For a vro;ect located within an airport land use vlan or. where such a vlan has not been
adovted. within two miles of a vublic airport or public use airoort. would the pro;ect exvose
veovle residinf! or workinf! in the pro;ect area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact: The project consists of a Municipal Code amendment and does not involve any
physical development. Moreover, the modification of existing parking ordinance guidelines will
have no affect related to the City's existing private use airport or noise levels associated thereto.
Mitigation Measures: None.
55) For a pro;ect within the vicinity of a vrivate airstriv. would the vro;ect expose veovle residinf!
or workinf! in the vro;ect area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact: Refer to response H-54 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
/'""" L. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
56) Induce substantial vovulation f!rowth in an area. either directly (for examvle. by vroposinf! new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for examvle. throuf!h extension of roads or other
infrastructure) ?
No Impact: The purpose of Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01 is to allow for a
change in Parking Ordinance guidelines for commercial and industrial development. The
proposed amendment to the Municipal Code would not induce substantial population growth in
the City, either directly or indirectly nor would it cause displacement of existing homes or
residents. The proposed project is a regulatory adjustment and does not include any physical
development activities. Therefore, the proposed amendment would have no significant impact
on population and housing.
Mitigation Measures: None.
57) Disvlace substantial numbers of existinf! housinf!. necessitatinf! the construction of revlacement
housinf! elsewhere?
No Impact: Refer to response L-56 above.
/'"""
Mitigation Measures: None.
AtENOA 'TEM NO. ~
PACEJD...:=OF ~~_-
City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
"'-'"
58) Displace substantial numbers of people. necessitating the construction of replacement housinfl
elsewhere?
No Impact: Refer to response L-56 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
M. PUBLIC SERVICES.
Would the proiect result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision
of new or physically altered flovemmental facilities. need for new or physically altered
flovemmental facilities. the construction of which could cause siflnificant environmental
impacts. in order to maintain acceptable service ratio. response times or other verformance
obiectives for any of the vublic service:
59) Fire protection?
No Impact. The proposed project is a regulatory adjustment and does not involve any
development. Therefore, the project will have no impact on the City's public services.
.....",
Mitigation Measures: None
60) Police protection?
No Impact: Refer to response M-59 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
61) Schools?
No Impact: Refer to response M-59 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
62) Parks?
No Impact: The proposed amendment to the City's Municipal Code would have no effect on
the number of persons using public parks. Therefore, the proposed amendment would have no
impacts on parks.
.,..."
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE ~~
?
OF S 4.
",..-- City of Lake Elsinore
. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
Mitigation Measures: None.
63) Other Public Facilities?
No Impact: Refer to response M-59 and M-62 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
N. RECREATION
64) Would the proposed pro;ect increase the use of existinf! neif!hborhood and ref!ionalparks or
other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
,.--..
No Impact: Refer to response M-59 and M-62 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
65) Does the pro;ect include recreational facilities or reQuire the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities that mif!ht have an adverse effect on the environment?
No Impact: Refer to response M-59 and M-62 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
O.
TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
66)
Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existinf! traffic load and
capacity of the street svstem (i.e.. result in a substantial increase in either the number ofvehicle
trips. the volume to capacity ratio on roads. or conf!estion at intersections)?
.-
No Impact: The proposed amendment is only related to off-street parking requirements for
commercial and industrial development. The project would not require the construction of new
roads nor induce additional use of public/private roads. Therefore, the project would have no
impact.
Mitigation Measures: None.
AtENDA lTEMNO.
PACE 4:\
~
OF S~
City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
'--'
67) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively. a level of service standard established bv the county
congestion manaJ!ement agency for desiJ!nated roads or hiJ!hwavs?
No Impact: Refer to response M-66 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
68) Result in a chanJ!e in traffic patterns. including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
No Impact: Refer to response M-66 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
69) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.J!., sham curves or danJ!erous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.J!., farm equipment)?
No Impact: Refer to response M-66 above.
'--'
Mitigation Measures: None.
70) Result in inadeQuate emerJ!ency access?
No Impact: Refer to response M-66 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
71) Result in inadeQuate parking capacity?
No Impact: The proposed Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment would: 1) eliminate compact
parking stalls from new developments, 2) modify drive aisle widths within parking areas, and 3)
establish a parking ratio requirement for medial uses. The proposed Text Amendment applies to
new development and establishes guidelines to mitigate deficient vehicle circulation and parking
availability. Therefore, the proposed amendment will result in adequate parking capacity for
new commercial and industrial developments in the City. Furthermore, the project would have a
beneficial impact on parking availability.
....,
Mitigation Measures: None.
ACENDA ITEM NO.
. PACE So OF_
~
5,-\
,- City of Lake Elsinore
?:oning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
72) Conflict with adopted policies. plans. or programs supportinf! alternative transportation (e.f!.,
bus turnouts. bicycle racks)?
No Impact: The proposed amendment modifies zoning criteria related to off-street parking.
Therefore, no relationship exists between the project and planning for alternative transportation
modes.
Mitigation Measures: None.
P.
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
73)
Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the avplicable Ref!ional Water Duality Control
Board?
~.
No Impact: The proposed amendment modifies zoning criteria related to off-street parking.
Therefore, no relationship exists "between the project and the environmental issue identified
above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
74) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existinf! facilities. the construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
No Impact: Refer to response P-73 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
75) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of
existing facilities. the construction ofwhich could cause sif!nificant environmental effects?
No Impact: Refer to response P-73 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
76)
,-
Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the pro;ect from existinf! entitlements and
resources. or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
No Impact: Refer to response P-73 above.
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAOE S \
~
Of S~
City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
"-"'"
Mitigation Measures: None.
77) Result in a determination bv the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the
pro;ect that it has adequate capacity to serve the pro;ect's pro;ected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
No Impact: Refer to response P-73 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
78) Be served bv a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the pro;ect's solid
waste disposal needs?
No Impact: Refer to response P-73 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
.~
79) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
No Impact: Refer to response P-73 above.
Mitigation Measures: None.
Q. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
80) Does the vro;ect have the potential to degrade the Quality of the environment. substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species. cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below
self-sustaininf! levels. threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community. reduce the number or
restrict the ranf!e of a rare or endanf!ered plant or animal or eliminate imoortant examples of
the ma;or periods of California history or orehistorv?
No Impact: The project involves regulatory changes to the Municipal Code and no physical
development activity that could affect biological resources. Therefore, the proposed amendment
will have no impact on any sensitive plant or animal species or habitat. Likewise, there will be
no conflict with any adopted city, county, regional, state or federal policies, goals, or plans
pertaining to the preservation and/or conservation of biological resources in the City of Lake
Elsinore.
......."
AGENDA ITEM rlo.
PAOE 5~
~
OF s~
r"" City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
81) Does the vroiect have imvacts that are individually limited. but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a vroiect are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of vast vroiects. the effects of other current vroiects.
and the effects ofvrobable future vroiects)?
No Impact: The project involves a Municipal Code amendment with no associated development
activity and, as such, there are no related or cumulative projects to be considered.
82) Does the vroiect have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beinfls. either directly or indirectly?
No Impact: The proposed project is a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment with no associated
physical environmental effects.
-End of Environmental Impact Evaluation Discussion -
~,
~
AGENDA'TEM NO.
PAGE 53>
~
OF 5~
City of Lake Elsinore
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment No. 2006-01
July 20, 2006
REFERENCES FOR ENIVRONMENTAL EVALUATION
The following references were utilized during preparation ofthis Initial Study:
1) City of Lake Elsinore General Plan.
'-'
,...."
,...."
ACENDA ITEM NO. . 'J..
fACiE S4 OF~~'-'
,-...
TO:
FROM:
DA TE:
PREPARED BY:
PROJECT TITLE:
,,--
APPLICANTS:
OWNER:
PROJECT REQUEST
,,--
1.
The applicants request approval to revise Ramsgate Specific Plan No. 89-1 as
follows:
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ,
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
AUGUST 1,2006
CAROLE K. DONAHOE, AICP,
PROJECT PLANNER
RAMS GATE SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 89-1, FOURTH
REVISION;
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475, REVISION
NO.1;
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231;
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2005-24;
ADDENDUM NO. 3, FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
(SCH NO. 88090525)
THE SHOPOFF GROUP, 8951 RESEARCH DRIVE,
IRVINE, CA 92618, ATTN: KRISTINE ZORTMAN,
PROJECT MANAGER; AND
MBK HOMES, 175 TECHNOLOGY, SUITE 200,
IRVINE, CA 92618, ATTN: PATTI GILLESPIE,
PROJECT MANAGER
WHITE ROCK ACQUISITION CO., L.P.,
8951 RESEARCH DRIVE, IRVINE, CA 92618
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
PAGE-L-oF -1./ /P
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006 '--'
RAMSGA TE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
· Add a medium high density residential development to the mix of housing types
in the specific plan, with appropriate design standards and guidelines. The
product is proposed at the southwest corner of Rosetta Canyon Drive and State
Route 74, replacing the commercial site at this location.
· Incorporate the conveyance ofland to permanent open space within the specific
plan, for coastal sage scrub preservation and wildlife habitat conservation.
· Incorporate the changes to the circulation system of the specific plan
necessitated by the additional allocation of open space.
2. The Shopoff Group requests approval to subdivide 37.3 acres into 132 single
family residential lots and eight (8) open space lots in accordance with Tentative
Tract Map No. 25475 Revision No.1.
3.
MBK Homes requests approval to subdivide 13.81 acres into one (1) lot for
condominium purposes in accordance with Tentative Tract Map No. 34231.
'--'
4. MBK Homes requests approval to construct 121 single family residential
condominiums in Tentative Tract Map No. 34231, along with a swimming pool,
meandering walkways, two (2) tot lots, and scattered barbecue areas. The
proposal includes a model home complex at the northeast corner of the site.
PROJECT LOCATION
The Ramsgate Specific Plan (Rams gate SP) is located approximately one mile east of
Interstate 15, south of Highway 74, and west of Greenwald Avenue.
The site of Tentative Tract Map No. 25475 Revision No.1 is located south of Scenic
Crest Drive, west of Greenwald, east of Grassy Meadow Drive, within the Ramsgate
Specific Plan, and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 349-240-034, -038, -072, -075.
The site of proposed Tentative Tract Map No. 34231 and Residential Design Review
No. 2005-24 is located at the southwest corner of Rosetta Canyon and Highway 74
within the Ramsgate Specific Plan, and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 347-120-047.
..",
AGENDA ITEM 3
PAGEJ::::-OF m
,..- REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
RAMSGATE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
BACKGROUND
The City Council approved the original Ramsgate SP in June 1984, and three (3)
subsequent revisions, the latest being in November 1991. In 2003, the applicant revised
several of the tract maps, and subsequently Centex Homes began developing four (4)
of the tracts on the west side of the specific plan. The apartments are also under
construction by Fairfield Development at the southwest comer of Highway 74 and.
Ardenwood Way. The elementary school site, the community park and fire station sites
have been rough graded, all along Rosetta Canyon Drive.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
".-
V acant, under Ramsgate Specific Plan Ramsgate Specific Plan
Project Site construction, Rosetta
Canyon residential
nei hborhoods
Scattered residential, North Peak Specific Plan North Peak SP, Future S
North vacant RR Rural Residential, Low Density Residentia
Coun 3 dwellin s/acre
Rl Single Family Low Medium Density (
South Vacant Residential, dus/ac), Low Density,
RR Rural Residential, Future SP, Canyon Cree
o en S ace SP
Centex Homes & Elsinore RR Rural Residential, Low Density, Tuscany
East Hills Elementary, under Tuscany Hills Specific Hills SP
construction, vacant Plan
West Residential County, RR Rural Business Park, Low
Residential, Rl Single Medium Density, Low
Famil Residential Densi
~
AGENDA ITEM 3
PAGEloFm
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006 '-'
RAMSGA TE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
PROJECT ANALYSIS
Residential Desie:n Review No. 2005-24 - "Trieste"
MBK Homes worked with staff to design a gated, single family neighborhood that
clusters townhomes around a central open space amenity. A swimming pool, tot lots
and barbecues are available to residents, as well as an extensive walking trail
throughout the site. Construction is proposed in five (5) phases, with the bulk of the
amenities provided to residents in the first phase.
Floor Plans
The three and four bedroom townhomes are offered in three (3) floorplans, all two
story, with two-car garages, and private courtyards. The plans range in size from 1,767
square feet, 1,875 square feet to 2,147 square feet.
Architecture, Materials and Colors
'-'
The Trieste development offers four (4) architectural styles, French Country, Cottage,
Spanish and Italianate. The materials proposed are tile roofing and stucco walls, with
wood, and a variety of stone veneers. There are twelve (12) color schemes, and all
palettes are a blend of muted, natural colors.
Because all the units are two-story, staff ensured that the applicant's architect carried
the architectural features to the sides and rears of the homes above the fence line. MBK
Homes is conditioned to provide four-sided articulation unless they can present
evidence on a case-by-case basis that side or rear elevations will not be visible to the
public.
Model Home Complex
MBK proposes to have a model complex to the west of the main entry on Rosetta
Canyon. The applicant has been conditioned to provide appropriate landscaping at the
model site.
"'"
AGENDA ITEM l
PAGE ~ OF --J..U,
r- REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
RAMSGA TE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
Loss of Neighborhood Commercial
The MBK project, if approved, will replace the 13.81 acres of Neighborhood
CommerCial designated in the Ramsgate SP for the comer of Rosetta Canyon Drive
and Highway 74. The Third Revision ofthe SP had a total of35.8 acres of commercial
to serve 3,330 homes. However, with the reduction in dwelling units, the amount of
acreage devoted to commercial uses was also reduced. With the proposed Fourth
Revision to the SP (which provides a total of2,243 dwellings), the applicant proposes
to remove commercial altogether from the plan. According to a marketing analysis
dated June 2006 by DDS Marketing, there is insufficient households in the catchment
area to support a retail grocer. furthermore, the applicant believes grocery chains have
not shown interest in the site because the intersection ofl-15 and SR 74, one mile to
the west, is quickly becoming the City's retail core, with Costco, Target, Lowes and
Home Depot.
~ Staff contends that the neighborhood commercial was originally intended to directly
serve the single family residents of Rams gate, as well as the multiple family apartments
under construction and the community park across the street. Efforts were made to
make Rosetta Canyon Drive pedestrian friendly, including the installation of a traffic
signal at Ardenwood and Rosetta Canyon Drive, to enable residents to walk to school,
work, play and services. Furthermore, staff believes that developments on the east side
of the SP, the La Strada development, and the North Tuscany Hills development will
be encouraged to use Greenwald and Highway 74, with a shopping center in Ramsgate
that could serve their everyday needs. While the marketing analysis may indicate that a
retail grocer could not be supported by the number of proposed households, there still
may be an opportunity for less intense neighborhood commercial uses to be
established.
Tentative Tract Map No. 34231
MBK intends to sell the units in Trieste as condominiums. Therefore, they have
submitted Tentative Tract Map No. 34231, as a one-lot subdivision for condominium
purposes. The site plan submitted as part ofthe Design Review provides the City with
sufficient detail regarding the design of the condominium project.
~
AGENDA ITEM 3
PAGE5 OF -Llb
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006 '-II'
RAMSGA TE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
Tentative Tract Map No. 25475 Revision No.1
The ShopoffGroup desires to develop Planning Area 6 of the Ramsgate SP. However,
due to the habitat value of Wasson Canyon and subsequent adoption of the Riverside
County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan by the City, the applicant's
development plan has been significantly scaled down. In 2003, approximately 682
acres of the Ramsgate SP were conveyed to Riverside County for permanent
preservation as natural open space, affecting the major portion of the original Planning
Area 6. All that remains of the 150.9 acres that can be developed is the small pocket of
37.3+ acres which comprise the proposed Tentative Tract Map No. 25475 Revision
No.1.
The Ramsgate SP calls for Medium Low Density Residential (3.6 to 5.0 dwelling units
per acre), and the map has been subdivided at a density of 3.5 dus/ac. The SP also calls
for a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet. The subdivision lot sizes range from 5,000
square feet to 12,156 square feet, with a average lot size of 6,592 square feet. In all
other respects, the map has been designed and conditioned to comply with the '-II'
development standards of the Ramsgate SP.
Primary and Secondary Access
The applicant resolved the concern by staff from the planning, engineering and fire
departments for adequate secondary access to the site, by providing an all-weather
emergency access route from "A" Street to Little V alley Road. This road is temporary
until the approval and development of Tentative Tract Map No. 33725 (also owned by
The ShopoffGroup and currently in process requiring annexation into the City), which
provides permanent secondary access to TTM 25475.
Parks and School
The original SP called for a park and school site within TTM 25475. However, staff
received verbal confirmation from the Lake Elsinore Unified School District that, due
to the significant decrease in dwelling units in the SP, they do not wish to pursue a
school site at that location.
'-II'
AGENDA ITEM 3
PAGEb- OF lIb
~ REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
RAMSGATE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
The applicant combined park and recreation needs of its future residents and those in
TTM 33725, by providing two (2) pocket parks and a trail system in TTM 33725
which would be central to both tracts. The first park is a "Marsh" passive park on the
north side of Scenic Crest Drive, while the second is an active park on the south side of
Scenic Crest Drive. Both amenities will include interpretive signage that explains the
conservation objectives of the MSHCP open space nearby.
Ramseate Specific Plan No. 89-1 Fourth Revision
The applicants have submitted the Fourth Revision to the Ramsgate SP to provide the
City with the necessary design guidelines and developmen~ standards for the proposed
Medium High Density Residential product. The SP A proposes a maximum density of
15 dwelling units per acre. However, the MBK project is designed at 8.76 dwelling
units per acre.
~ The Fourth Revision also incorporates the conveyance ofland within the SP for habitat
conservation, and the resultant changes to the circulation system.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Addendum No.3 to the Final Supplemental EIR was prepared in conformance with the
California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (Public Resources Code,
Section 21000 et.seq.); the State Guidelines for Implementation ofCEQA as amended
(California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15000, et.seq.);
applicable requirements of the City of Lake Elsinore; and the regulations, requirements
and procedures of any other responsible public agency or agency with jurisdiction by
law.
Based upon review of the proposed project, including reviews by the City of Lake
Elsinore Planning, Engineering and Building Divisions, and other reviewing agencies,
the City has concluded that an Addendum was the appropriate document, as described
below:
1.
The proposed project will not result in any new significant environmental
effects or substantially increase the severity of previously identified
~
AGENDA ITEM -3
PAGE:l OF --Jlb
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006 ....,
RAMSGA TE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
significant effects. The degree or level of environmental effects resulting
from the proposed project will either be less than or equal to those found in
the certified 1989 Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (State
Clearinghouse No. 88090525).
2. The proposed project will result in the development of less acreage with
fewer dwelling units than that addressed in the certified 1989 Final
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report.
3.
Substantial changes have not occurred with respect to the circumstances
under which the proposed project will be developed. Though new
developments have occurred in the surrounding areas, they were developed
in accordance with those zoning standards that were in existence in 1989,
and therefore, were considered in the cumulative evaluations contained in the
1989 Final Supplemental EIR. The proposed project will have either the
same level of impact or less of an impact on the environment than the
original specific plan.
....,
4. ,The City is not aware of any new information of substantial importance,
which was previously unknown or could not have been known at the time the
1989 Final Supplemental EIR was certified, which would show the project to
have significant effects that were not described in the previous EIR.
5. There is no new information that would indicate that the significant effects
previously evaluated would be more severe than those discussed or
referenced in the 1989 Final Supplemental EIR. The technical reports and
assessments prepared for the proposed project (e.g. biological and cultural
resource assessments) do not conclude that greater impacts would result with
the proposed project or reveal any new information that was not previously
considered in the 1989 Final Supplemental EIR.
Therefore, an Addendum to the EIR is the appropriate document since all potentially
significant effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and that although some changes or additions are necessary,
none of the conditions described in California Code of Regulations, Section 15162
~
AGENDAJTEM 3
PAGE.JLOF ~
,-- REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
RAMSGATE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
exist. The changes and modifications assessed in this Addendum do not change the
conclusions stated in the previous EIR. Additionally, the modifications do not
introduce any new issues about the significant environmental effects of the proposed
project and they will not result in any new significant unavoidable project impacts
beyond those previously identified in the EIR.
RECOMMENDA TION
Addendum No.3 to the Final Supplemental EIR
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2006-_,
recommending to the City Council certification of Addendum No.3 to the Final
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 88090525).
,-- Addendum Certification Findings
1. Addendum No.3 to the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report
(FSEIR) for Ramsgate is complete, contains all required information, and has
been completed in compliance with California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), utilizing criteria set forth in Section 15164 of the CEQA
Guidelines.
2. Addendum No. 3 is the appropriate document because changes and
modifications proposed by the project do not change the conclusions stated
in the previous EIR.
3. The specific plan modifications do not introduce any new issues about the
significant environmental effects ofthe proposed project, nor will they result
in any new significant unavoidable project impacts beyond those previously
identified.
4. Substantial changes have not occurred with respect to those circumstances
under which the proposed project will be developed.
,-.....
AGENDA ITEM 3
PAGE:L OF -1L b
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006 ,....,
RAMS GATE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
5. The City is not aware of any new information of substantial importance,
which was previously unknown or could not have been known at the time
that the 1989 FSEIR was adopted, which show the project to have significant
effects that were not described in the previous EIR. The technical reports and
assessments prepared for the proposed project do not conclude that greater
impacts would result with the proposed project, or reveal any new
information that was not previously considered.
6. The updated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program establishes a
mechanism and procedures for implementing and verifying the
implementation of and compliance with the project design features and
mitigation measures pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081.6.
Consistency with the MSHCP
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2006-_,
recommending to the City Council adoption of Findings of Consistency with the ,....,
Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan.
MSHCP Findings
1. 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 includes two (2) tentative tract maps (TTMs) and
requires a number of discretionary approvals from the City, including
CEQA review. Pursuant to the City's MSHCP Resolution, the project has
been reviewedfor MSHCP consistency, including consistency with "Other
Plan Requriements." These include the Protection of Species Associated
with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines (MSHCP, S 6.1.2),
Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines (MSHCP, S 6.1.3),
Additional Survey Needs and Procedures (MSHCP, S 6.3.2),
Urban/Wildlands InterfaceGuidelines (MSHCP, S 6.1.4), Vegetation
Mapping (MSHCP, S 6.3.1) requirements, Fuels Management Guidelines
,....,
AGENDA ITEM 3
PAGE 1Q OF]ll,
/"'""' REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
RAMS GATE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
(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 project site is within the MSHCP Lake Elsinore Area Plan. The site
proposed for Tentative Tract Map No. 25475 Revision No. 1 lies within
Criteria Cell 4176 and Independent Criteria Cells 4174, 4178 and 4272.
Therefore, a formal and complete LEAP (Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process)
application, LEAP 2005-10 was submitted to the City on December 9, 2005.
This application and documentation was reviewed by the City and it was
determined that no additional conservation is requiredfor compliance with the
MSHCP. The City also determined that TTM 25475 had complied with the
MSHCP "Other Plan Requirements." The City's LEAP determination was
,- submitted to the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority
(RCA) for its Joint Project Review (JPR), and was given a finding of
consistency by the RCA on May 1,2006.
TTM 34231 is not located within an MSHCP Criteria Cell area, therefore, no
formal LEAP submittal was required. However, the project is stillrequired to
demonstrate compliance with "Other Plan Requirements." Both TTMs
are in compliance as described further below.
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 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 h
conversation 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
AGENDA ITEM 3.-
PAGE lL OF -1-1-.1,
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1, 2006 ~
RAMSGATE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
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 proposed 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 ofTTM 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 of a 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 proposed 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 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 surveysfor 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 peR
.....,
AGENDA ITEM 3
PAGE J2-0F Jlb
,- REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
RAMS GATE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
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 ow/. No
owls were observed during any of these surveys; therefore, TTM No. 25475 is
consistent with the policies ofMSHCP Section 6.3.2. However, as required by
the MSHCP, an additional pre-construction survey for burrowing owl will be
included as a condition of project approval.
~
In addition, TTM No. 34231 is located within the survey area identifiedfor
the burrowing owl. The site has already been rough graded and adjacent
road improvements constructed. No suitable burrowing owl habitat
currently exists on the project site. However, due to the migratory nature of
the burrowing owl, there is a possibility that although burrowing owls are
not currently located on the project site, they could occupy the site prior to
actual project construction. Therefore a pre-construction burrowing owl
survey will be required per the MSHCP.
Based upon the above, it can be concluded that the proposed TTM No. 25475
and TTM No. 34231 are consistent with the provisions of the MSHCP.
6. The proposed project is consistent with the UrbanlWildlands Interface
Guidelines.
~
The TTM No. 25475 site is located adjacent to land that has been set aside
for conservation. Therefore the project is required to comply with the
policies setforth 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
AGENDA ITEM 3
PAGE J3- OF lIb
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1, 2006 ~
RAMSGATE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
implementation of mitigation measures the project will minimize the adverse
effects of the project on conservation configuration and would 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.
The TTM No. 34231 project site is separatedfrom nearby criteria cells by
existing residential subdivisions located within the Ramsgate Specific Plan.
Therefore, the urban/wildlands interface guidelines set forth in Section 6.1.4
of the MSHCP are not applicable.
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
applicationfor TTM 25475. This mapping is consistent with MSHCP mapping
protocol. The mapping is sufficient under the MSHCP and is consistent with the
MSHCP requirements. No vegetation mapping requirements apply to TTM .......,
34231.
8. The proposed project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines.
The TTM No. 25475 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
No. 25475 is therefore consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines.
The TTM No. 34231 site is separatedfrom nearby criteria cells by existing
residential subdivisions located within the Ramsgate Specific Plan.
Therefore, the fuels management guidelines set forth in the MSHCP are not
applicable.
.......,
AGENDA ITEM 3
PAGE~OFJlb
,....... REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
RAMSGA TE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
9. The proposed project will be conditioned to pay the City's MSHCP Local
Development Mitigation Fee.
Conditions of Approval require that prior to the issuance of a building permits
the applicant pay the City's Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan
Local Development Mitigation Fee in effect at that time. The current fee for
residential development with a density of less than 8.0 dwelling units peracre
is $1,651 per dwelling unit. Residential development with a density between 8.1
and 14.0 dwelling units per acre shall pay $1,057 per dwelling unit at the
present time.
lO.The proposed project overall is consistent with the MSHCP.
The City received a letter dated May 1, 2006, from Sarah Lozano, Western
,,- Riverside Regional Conservation Authority stating that TTM 25475 is
consistent with the MSHCP from both a criteria and other plan perspective.
Because there was noformal LEAP requirementfor TTM No. 34231, the City
ensured the consistency of this project site with the MSHCP.
The City received a letter dated February 27, 2006, from Thomas B. Mullen,
Executive Director, Western Riverside Regional Conservation Authority
stating that projects within the Ramsgate Specific Plan are covered by the
mitigation program contained in that plan and accepted in anticipation of the
MSHCP being adopted and the agency permits signed. Mr. Mullen concludes
that the preservation of the mitigated lands for the Ramsgate SP helped to
insure that the permits were signed.
Staff concurs that the entire project is consistent with the MSHCP and
provides effective conservation on the project site to meet the biological
issues and considerations of the MSHCP.
11. There is no substantial evidence, in the light of the whole record before the
agency, that the project as revised may have significant effect on the
,,- environment.
AGENDArIc:TEM 3
PAGEU OF J1b
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006 "w1J/If
RAMSGA TE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
Tentative Tract Map No. 25475 Revision No.1
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2006 - _,
recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 25475
Revision No.1, based upon Exhibit 'D' and the following Findings, and subject to the
Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 25475 Revision No.1.
TTM 25475 Revision No.1 Findings:
1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provIsIOns for its design and
improvements, is consistent with the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan. The
proposed subdivision is compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses
and programs specified in the General Plan (Government Code Section 66473.5).
a. The design of the proposed subdivision and density of 3.5 dwelling units per
acre are consistent with the Ramsgate Specific Plan Third or Fourth Revision,
and therefore with the General Plan.
"w1J/If
b. The project proposes single family residential lots ranging in size from 5,000
squarefeet to 12,156 squarefeet, with an average lot size of6,592 squarefeet,
which is consistent with the SF.
2. The site of the proposed division of land is physically suitable for the proposed
density of development in accordance with the General Plan.
a. The General Plan encourages clustered development in order to facilitate the
conservation of identified wildlife corridors and habitat. The project density and
design is compatible with proposed or approved maps to the north and east.
b. The map provides open space areas that protect the natural topography and
VIews.
3. The effects that this project are likely to have upon the housing needs of the region,
the public service requirements of its residents and the available fiscal and
environmental resources have been considered and balanced.
,...."
AGENDA lTEM 3
PAGE&OF lib
/'"'
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
RAMS GATE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
a. The project is consistent with the City's General Plan. During the approval of
City's General Plan, housing needs, public services and fiscal resources were
scrutinized to achieve a balance within the City.
b. The map has been conditioned to annex into Community Facilities District
2003-01 to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project on public
safety operations and maintenance issues in the City.
c. The map has been conditioned to annex into Lighting and Landscape
Maintenance District No. 1 to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the
project on public right-of-way landscaped areas to be maintained by the City,
andfor street lights in the public right-of-way for which the City will pay for
electricity and a maintenance fee to Southern California Edison.
",- d. The map has been conditioned to form a Mello-Roos Community Facilities
District to fund the on-going operation and maintenance of the new parks,
parkways, open space and public storm drains constructed with in the
development and federal NPDES requirements to offset the annual negative
fiscal impacts of the project.
4. The design of the proposed division of land or type of improvements is not likely to
cause serious public health problems.
a. Tentative Tract Map No. 25475 Revision No.1 is conditioned to comply with all
development standards of the Ramsgate Specific Plan Third or Fourth Revision.
These standards have been prepared and reviewed to benefit the public health,
safety and welfare.
5. The design of the proposed division of land or the type of improvements will not
conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of
property within the proposed division of land.
a. All known easements or requests for access have been incorporated into
/'"' Tentative Tract Map No. 25475 Revision No.1.
AGENDA ITEM 3
PAGE a OF 11.b
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006 ......,
RAMSGA TE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
b. The map has been circulated to City departments and outside agencies, and
appropriate conditions of approval have been applied for their approval during
construction.
Ramsgate Specific Plan No. 89-1 Fourth Revision
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission consider the loss of commercial uses
in the proposed specific plan amendment before making a decision regarding Ramsgate
Specific Plan No. 89-1 Fourth Revision, Tentative Tract Map No. 34231 for
Condominium Purposes, and Residential Design Review No. 2005-24.
If the Planning Commission wishes to approve the proposed Ramsgate Specific Plan
No. 89-1 Fourth Revision, the Commission should adopt Resolution No. 2006-_,
recommending to the City Council approval of Ramsgate Specific Plan No. 89-1
Fourth Revision, subject to Conditions of Approval, and based upon Exhibit "C" and
the following findings:......"
Findings for Approval of Ramsgate Specific Plan No. 89-1 Fourth Revision:
1. The location and design of the proposed development is consistent with the goals
and policies of the City's General Plan and with any other applicable plan or
policies adopted by the City, or in the process of being prepared and adopted.
a. The General Plan supports the development of the Ramsgate Specific Plan. The
proposed Revision has been reviewed and conditioned to enhance and update
the original Specific Plan.
b. The proposal has been designed to support the objectives of the Multi-Species
Habitat Conservation Plan adopted by the City, by preserving habitat areas
identified in the Conservation Plan.
c. A marketing analysis by DDS Marketing dated June 2006 determined that there
is insufficient households in the catchment area to support a retail grocer.
.....,
AGENDA ITEM 3
PAGEtl OF (11
".- REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
RAMSGA TE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
2. The proposed location allows the development to be well-integrated with or
adequately buffered from its surroundings, whichever may be the case.
a. The proposed Revision integrates development of medium high density
residential, as a buffer between apartment development to the west and the
single family detached residential neighborhoods to the east.
b. The proposed Revision increases the variety of housing types offered in the
Ramsgate Specific Plan.
3. All vehicular traffic generated by the development, either in phased increments or
at full build-out, is to be accommodated safely and without causing undue
congestion upon adjoining streets.
".-
a. The environmental review of the Fourth Revision indicates that traffic generated
by the proposed project will be significantly less than that generated by the
previously approved specific plan. Project trip generation is reduced from
16,000 daily trips to 2,775 daily trips.
b. The City of Lake Elsinore General Plan states that the objective of the City is to
"strive to maintain a minimum Level of Service fC' at all intersections during
non-peak hours and Level of Service fD' at all intersections during peak hours
to ensure that traffic delays are kept to a minimum. " Exceptfor the intersection
of River Road at State Route 74 in the County, all intersections within the study
area will meet the City's level of service objective.
4. The Final Specific Plan shall identify a methodology to allow land uses to be
adequately serviced by existing or proposed public facilities and services.
a. The proposed Revision has been reviewed and conditioned to provide adequate
public services to the site.
,,--..
b. The proposed Revision provides recreational amenities, pedestrian pathways,
and open space for residents in the medium high density residential
development.
AGENDA ITEM -3
PAGE 11 OF J1l
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006 ""
RAMSGATE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
5. The overall design of the Specific Plan shall produce an attractive, efficient and
stable development.
a. The proposed Revision will allow the construction of a mix of residential
units within Ramsgate. Design Guidelines have been included to establish a
consistent design expression among site planning, architectural and
landscaping components while allowing reasonable flexibility in design.
6. In accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), impacts have been reduced to a level of non-significance, or in the case
where impacts remain, a Statement of Overriding Considerations is recommended
for adoption to justify the merits of project implementation.
Tentative Tract Map No. 34231 for Condominium Purposes
Findings for Approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 34231:
""
1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and
improvements, is consistent with the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan. The
proposed subdivision is compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses
and programs specified in the General Plan (Government Code Section 66473.5).
a. The design of the proposed map is for a one-lot subdivision consistent with the
Ramsgate Specific Plan Fourth Revision, and therefore with the General Plan.
2. The site of the proposed division of land is physically suitable for the proposed
density of development in accordance with the General Plan.
a. The General Plan encourages clustered development in order to facilitate the
conservation of identified wildlife corridors and habitat.
b. The project density and design is compatible with proposed apartments and
community park adjacent to it.
""
AGENDA ITEM 3
PAGE dO OF lli
/"'""' REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
RAMSGA TE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
b. The map provides open space areas that protect the natural topography and
views.
3. The effects that this project are likely to have upon the housing needs of the region,
the public service requirements of its residents and the available fiscal and
environmental resources have been considered and balanced.
a. The project is consistent with the City's General Plan. During the approval of
City's General Plan, housing needs, public services andfiscal resources were
scrutinized to achieve a balance within the City.
b. The map has been conditioned to annex into Community Facilities District
2003-01 to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project on public
safety operations and maintenance issues in the City.
/"'""' c. The map has been conditioned to annex into Lighting and Landscape
Maintenance District No. 1 to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the
project on public right-of way landscaped areas to be maintained by the City,
and for street lights in the public right-of way for which the City will pay for
electricity and a maintenance fee to Southern California Edison.
d. The map has been conditioned to form a Mello-Roos Community Facilities
District to fund the on-going operation and maintenance of the new parks,
parkways, open space and public storm drains constructed with in the
development and federal NPDES requirements to offset the annual negative
fiscal impacts of the project.
4. The design of the proposed division ofland or type of improvements is not likely to
cause serious public health problems.
a. Tentative Tract Map No. 34231 is conditioned to comply with all development
standards of the Ramsgate Specific Plan Fourth Revision. These standards have
been prepared and reviewed to benefit the public health, safety and welfare.
.---
AGEND~HEM 3
PAGE~ OF --Jlb
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1, 2006 ~
RAMSGATE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
5. The design of the proposed division of land or the type of improvements will not
conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of
property within the proposed division of land.
a. All known easements or requests for access have been incorporated into
Tentative Tract Map No. 34231.
b. The map has been circulated to City departments and outside agencies, and
appropriate conditions of approval have been applied for their approval during
construction.
Residential Design Review No. 2005-24
Findings for Approval of Residential Design Review No. 2005-24:
1. The project as conditioned will comply with the goals and objectives of the General
Plan. .~
a. The General Plan designates the site Ramsgate SP, and proposed Ramsgate SP
Fourth Revision designates the site for Medium High Density Residential (J 5
dwelling units per acre). Design Review No. 2005-24 implements a density well
below that, at 8. 76 dwelling units per acre.
b. The project proposes single family residential condominium townhomes
ranging in sizefrom 1,767 squarefeet, 1,875 squarefeetand 2,147 squarefeet,
which is consistent with the proposed Ramsgate SP Fourth Revision.
2. The project complies with the design directives contained in Section 17.82.060 and
all other applicable provisions of the City Municipal Code.
a. Staff has reviewed the project with adjacent neighborhoods and finds that it
complements their quality of construction, provides a pleasing use of color and
materials, and demonstrates a respect for privacy and views.
...,
AGENDA ITEM 3
PAGE#OF IJb
,-.. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
RAMSGA TE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
b. The project offers visually attractive landscaping, useable open space, and
recreational amenities to its residents.
3. Conditions and safeguards pursuant to Section 17.82.070, including guarantees and
evidence of compliance with conditions, have been incorporated into the approval
of the subject project to ensure development of the property in accordance with the
objectives of this Chapter and the planning district in which the site is located.
a. The project provides or has been conditioned to provide architectural design,
landscaping, phasing, and fencing consistent with design standards and
guidelines.
Should the Planning Commission wish to recommend denial of Ramsgate Specific
Plan No. 89-1 Fourth Revision, the Commission should adopt Resolution No. 2006-
,-.. _, based on the following Findings:
Findings for Denial of Ramsgate Specific Plan No. 89-1 Fourth Revision,
Tentative Tract Map No. 34231, and Residential Design Review No. 2005-24:
I; 2 Or" b"
CD The location and design of the proposed development is not consistent with the
goals and policies of the City's General Plan and with any other applicable plan or
policies adopted by the City, or in the process of being prepared and adopted.
a. The General Plan supports the development of the Ramsgate Specific Plan
Third Revision. The proposed Fourth Revision eliminates altogether any
commercial uses from the Specific Plan that could serve residents within the
Specific Plan neighborhoods, the residents utilizing the community park, and
residents in surrounding developments.
@ The proposed location does not allow the development to be well-integrated with or
adequately buffered from its surroundings, whichever may be the case.
,-..
AGENDA ITEM 3
P AGEd-5 OF JIb
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1, 2006 ~
RAMS GATE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
a. The proposed Revision introduces development of medium high density
residential, where the Specific Plan had already buffered existing uses with a
commercial site.
b. The proposed loss of commercial uses does not integrate services intended to
meet the needs of residents within the Ramsgate Specific Plan.
c. The marketing analysis submitted by the applicant does not accurately include
potential customers within the catchment area that could utilize a commercial
center at Ramsgate.
3. All vehicular traffic generated by the development, either in phased increments or at
full build-out, is to be accommodated safely and without causing undue congestion
upon adjoining streets.
a. The environmental review of the Fourth Revision indicates that traffic generated
by the proposed project will be significantly less than that generated by the ~
previously approved specific plan. Project trip generation is reduced from
16,000 daily trips to 2,775.
b. The City of Lake Elsinore General Plan states that the objective of the City is to
"strive to maintain a minimum Level of Service 'C' at all intersections during
non-peak hours and Level of Service 'D' at all intersections during peak hours
to ensure that traffic delays are kept to a minimum." Except for the intersection
of River Road at State Route 74 in the County, all intersections within the study
area will meet the City's level of service objective.
c. The tracts adjacent to the commercial site were designed to promote pedestrian
access, including a traffic signal at Ardenwood and Rosetta Canyon Drive, a
switchback walkway in Tract 25479 from Bronze Star Road to Rosetta Canyon
Drive, and an RTA bus stop on Ardenwood.
4. The Final Specific Plan shall identify a methodology to allow land uses to be
adequately serviced by existing or proposed public facilities and services.
~
AGENDA ITEM 3
P AGE~ OF 1l.b
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
RAMSGA TE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
,,--
a. The proposed Revision has been reviewed and conditioned to provide adequate
public services to the site.
mhe overall design of the Specific Plan does not produce an attractive, efficient and
V-stable development.
a. The loss of commercial will discourage the development of a pedestrian-
oriented community, where services and amenities are within walking distance
to residences.
PREPARED BY:
CAROLE K. DONAHOE, PROJECT PLANNER
/hmL--
Rolfe M. Preisendanz,
Director of Community Development
,,--
APPROVED BY:
ATTACHMENTS:
,,--
1.
2.
Exhibit 'A' - Vicinity Map
Resolution No. 2006- _, recommending certification of Addendum No.3
to the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report
a. Exhibit 'B' - Addendum No.3 document (Separate cover)
Resolution No. 2006- _, recommending adoption of Findings of
Consistency with the MSHCP
Resolution No. 2006- _, recommending approval of Ramsgate Specific
Plan No. 89-1 Fourth Revision
a. Conditions of Approval
b. Exhibit 'c' - Ramsgate Specific Plan No. 89-1 Fourth Revision
document (Separate cover)
Resolution No. 2006-_, recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map
No. 25475 Revision No.1
3.
4.
5.
AGENDA ITEM 3b
P AGEd-.-2. OF 11
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
RAMS GATE SPA 4, TTMS 25475 & 34231, DR 2005-24, ADDENDUM NO.3
...",
a.
b.
c.
Conditions of Approval
Exhibit 'D' - Full-size TTM 25475 Rev. 1
Exhibit 'E' - Reduced color illustrative
(Enclosure)
(Enclosure)
6. Resolution No. 2006-_, recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map No.
34231 For Condominium Purposes
a. Conditions of Approval
b. Exhibit 'F' - Full-size TTM 34231 (Enclosure)
7. Resolution No. 2006- _, approving Residential Design Review No. 2005-24
a. Conditions of Approval
b. Exhibit 'G' - Full-size Site Plan (Enclosure)
c. Exhibit 'H' - Reduced color Site Plan (Enclosure)
d. Exhibit'!' - Phasing Plan (Enclosure)
e. Exhibit' J' - Conceptual Landscape Plan (Enclosure)
f. Exhibit 'K' - Floor Plans, Elevations,
and Street Scene (Enclosure)
g. Exhibit 'M' - Model Complex Plan (Enclosure) ,...,
,...,
AGENDA ITEM 3-
PAGE d-b OF ill
VICINITY MAP
RAMSGATE SPECIFIC PLAN 89-1 FOURTH REVISION
.""""' TIM 25475 REVISION 1
TTM 34231 CONDO MAP
DESIGN REVIEW 2005-24
ADDENDUM 3 TO THE FSEIR
l "
_ L--_-..- ~ .~~
~
--.:r.."...., .';
.l.J... 'r$
~
~
,\b<
C:J~ iTiI"M 34231
~ ~..,~.
~ l:-
i 1
~ v'
~1~1(
~ ~;. ""1J ~
P
'~0
~'?p~-
\('^-.
~
/ H ~"'\."'~~~"'" \ / I II
I I ( 1(--..r~;;;':'::1 ~ ir......'{ I
M IIIJ ./'J' lLL
C~---- t-~_
MAURICIO ST ....-;;f-.' 1
~ 11 kkt~f -'-~
l) ~ s~;]!r, ~ ~----/ ~ _ _ Cp~ RD=---
~ '7IlI"'" r ~ ~ RIVERSIDE st--- II
I ~ I
1 L/
.ll Ilia A --
HAR0N'5T VI ,~
D-- -; <(-:Q.,......-.-
JEREMIA'" DR ~ ~-J..O~ /
Ur v~
~O~
c:,~
~'Yj'1
1..1
II I
""'-
"l
I--
I-
l
L- \=-
-L
~\
'<:'I..
-~,
f--
1:====
-
."
I
-
-
-
I
,
\ " j
.
.
. .
'.. ~:RE~W RD lh~tJ
iTiTM 25475 F~ -
C,:)-
-- \
,
- 'II. ../
.If€ 1ft" i IJ ,~I .
- . 1Y0I:L"'JD ~ i ~
\. / t-")
~ I - "... RAMSGATE.
jl PROJEC: S~E 7' 'SPECIFIC PLAN
..... " '-', i' \
\ ./
--- I ~."-.. \. .~\
-
-
.... ......
.......
~ -
~I
~V~
I
I
..
" -'.::::,. rr, I/
...-.............. 4 ~ I
- ,......{ -r i' ~
-1 \~ -~ /'[./ .
\...-{. [II
----........ '-..
~~ T'\
"
J
~
'"
Q.
I----
I
~
PLANNING COMMISSION
EXHIBIT
'4 '
~
ACENDA ITEM No.3
PAGE).l . OF lU.-
\.
if - Rsr~~
RESOLUTION NO. 2006--.f L\. J/
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
CERTIFICATION OF ADDENDUM NO. 3 TO THE FINAL
SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
(SCH NO. 88090525).
~
WHEREAS, White Rock Acquisition Co., L.P. has submitted applications
for Ramsgate Specific Plan No. 89-1 Fourth Revision, Tentative Tract Map No.
25475 Revision No.1, Tentative Tract Map No. 34231, and Residential Design
Review No. 2005-24 (Ramsgate applications), located approximately one mile east
of Interstate 15, south of Highway 74, and west of Greenwald Avenue; and
WHEREAS, these Ramsgate applications comprise the "project" as defined
by Section 21065 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), California
Public Resources Code ~ 21000 et seq., which is defined as an activity which may
cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably
foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment and which includes the ...,
issuance to a person of a lease, permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement for
use by one or more public agencies; and
WHEREAS, Addendum No. 3 to the Final Supplemental Environmental
Impact Report (SCH No. 88090525) has been prepared to evaluate environmental
impacts resulting with the project; and
WHEREAS, public notice of said project has been given, and the Planning
Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development
Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this
item on August 1, 2006;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE
AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
'-'"
ACENDA~~.3 b ~
PACE ~ ..Of 1I_ _
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-_
PAGE20F3
~
SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the Addendum
prepared for the Ramsgate applications. The Planning Commission finds and
determines that the document was prepared in conformance with CEQA and is the
appropriate environmental document for the project, based upon the following
findings:
1. Addendum No. 3 to the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact
Report (FSEIR) for Ramsgate is complete, contains all required
information, and has been completed in compliance with California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), utilizing criteria set forth in Section
15164 of the CEQA Guidelines.
2. Addendum No.2 is the appropriate document because changes and
modifications proposed by the project do not change the conclusions
stated in the previous EIR.
3.
The modifications do not introduce any new issues about the significant
environmental effects of the proposed project, nor will they result in any
new significant unavoidable project impacts beyond those previously
identified.
/"""
4. Substantial changes have not occurred with respect to those
circumstances under which the proposed project will be developed.
5. The City is not aware of any new information of substantial importance,
which was previously unknown or could not have been known at the time
that the 1989 FSEIR was adopted, which show the project to have
significant effects that were not described in the previous EIR. The
technical reports and assessments prepared for the proposed project do
not conclude that greater impacts would result with the proposed project,
or reveal any new information that was not previously considered.
6. The updated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program establishes a
mechanism and procedures for implementing and verifying the
implementation of and compliance with the project design features and
mitigation measures pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081.6.
/"""
ACEHllAmMNO.3 r
PAGE J- '7 OF /I
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-_
PAGE30F3
SECTION 2. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date
of its passage and adoption.
~
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this first day of August, 2006,
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
Michael O'Neal, Chairman
City of Lake Elsinore
ATTEST:
~
Rolfe Preisendanz
Director of Community Development
~
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
PAOE 30 OF Ilk
~f~ - ~-o
/'"""
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-b5
vt/
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
ADOPTION OF FINDINGS OF CONSISTENCY WITH
THE MULTI-SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION
PLAN (MSHCP) FOR THE PROJECTS KNOWN AS
RAMSGATE SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 89-1 FOURTH
REVISION, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475
REVISION NO.1, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231,
AND RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2005-24,
LOCATED APPROXIMATELY ONE MILE EAST OF
INTERSTATE 15, SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 74, AND WEST
OF GREENWALD AVENUE.
WHEREAS, White Rock Acquisition Co., L.P. has submitted applications
for Ramsgate Specific Plan No. 89-1 Fourth Revision, Tentative Tract Map No.
25475 Revision No.1, Tentative Tract Map No. 34231, and Residential Design
Review No. 2005-24 (Ramsgate applications), located approximately one mile east
of Interstate 15, south of Highway 74, and west of Greenwald Avenue;
/"""'
WHEREAS, these Ramsgate applications comprise the "project" as defined
by Section 21065 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), California
Public Resources Code ~ 21000 et seq., which is defined as an activity which may
cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably
foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment and which includes the
issuance to a person of a lease, permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement for
use by one or more public agencies; and
WHEREAS, Addendum No.3 to the Final Supplemental Environmental
Impact Report (SCH No. 88090525) has been prepared to evaluate environmental
impacts resulting with the project; and
WHEREAS, public notice of said project has been given, and the Planning
Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development
Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this
item on August 1, 2006.
/"""'
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
PAGE 3 J OF /I b
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
MSHCP CONSISTENCY FOR RAMSGATE SPA 4, ET.AL.
PAGE TWO OF EIGHT
......,
NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMISSION OF THE CITY
OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND
ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the proposed
Ramsgate applications and their consistency with the MSHCP prior to making a
decision to recommend that the City Council adopt Findings of consistency with
the MSHCP.
SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning laws
and the City of Lake Elsinore, findings for adoption have been made as follows:
MSHCP CONSISTENCY FINDINGS
1. 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 includes two (2) tentative tract maps (TTMs) and
requires a number of discretionary approvals from the City, including
CEQA review. Pursuant to the City's MSHCP Resolution, the project has
been reviewedfor MSHCP consistency, including consistency with "Other
Plan Requriements. " 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 InterfaceGuidelines (MSHCP, ~ 6.1.4), Vegetation
Mapping (MSHCP, ~ 6.3.1) requirements, Fuels Management Guidelines
(MSHCP, ~ 6.4), andpayment 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.
.....,
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
PAGE '1d- OF 11.b
/'""'
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006- _
MSHCP CONSISTENCY FOR RAMSGATE SPA 4 ET.AL.
PAGE THREE OF EIGHT
The project site is within the MSHCP Lake Elsinore Area Plan. The site
proposed for Tentative Tract Map No. 25475 Revision No.1 lies within
Criteria Cell 4176 and Independent Criteria Cells 4174,4178 and 4272.
Therefore, aformal and complete LEAP (Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process)
application, LEAP 2005-10 was submitted to the City on December 9, 2005.
This application and documentation was reviewed by the City and it was
determined that no additional conservation is required for compliance with
the MSHCP. The City also determined that TTM 25475 had complied with
the MSHCP "Other Plan Requirements." The City's LEAP determination
was submitted to the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation
Authority (RCA) for its Joint Project Review (JPR), and was given a finding
of consistency by the RCA on May 1, 2006.
~.
TTM 34231 is not located within an MSHCP Criteria Cell area, therefore,
no formal LEAP submittal was required. However, the project is still
required to demonstrate compliance with "Other Plan Requirements. " Both
TTMs are in compliance as described further below.
3. The proposed project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and
Vemal Pools Guidelines.
~
No vernal pools exist on the site and 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 conversation 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 targetedfor conservation through
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
PAGE ::j3 OF II b
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
MSHCP CONSISTENCY FOR RAMS GATE SPA 4 ET.AL.
PAGE FOUR OF EIGHT
.~
consistency with Section 6.1.2 occur within bank boundaries, and the bank is
within the MSHCP Conservation Area boundaries.
4. The proposed 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 ofTTM No. 25475. This
population of the Munz's onion occurs outside of the Conservation Area
spelled out in the Cell Criteriafor the tentative tract and the project site is
not one of the fifteen known locations targeted for conservation.
Additionally, since the site lies outside of a 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 proposed 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 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
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
PAGE 3Lf OF lit
~
,;""""
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
MSHCP CONSISTENCY FOR RAMS GATE SPA 4 ET.AL.
PAGE FIVE OF EIGHT
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 owl
will be included as a condition of project approval.
In addition, TTM No. 34231 is located within the survey area identifiedfor
the burrowing owl. The site has already been rough graded and adjacent
road improvements constructed. No suitable burrowing owl habitat
currently exists on the project site. However, due to the migratory nature of
the burrowing owl, there is a possibility that although burrowing owls are
not currently located on the project site, they could occupy the site prior to
actual project construction. Therefore a pre-construction burrowing owl
survey will be required per the MSHCP.
,;""""
Based upon the above, it can be concluded that the proposed TTM No.
25475 and TTM No. 34231 are consistent with the provisions of the
MSHCP.
6. The proposed project IS consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface
Guidelines.
~
The TTM No. 25475 site is located adjacent to land that has been set aside
for conservation. Therefore the project is required to comply with the
policies setforth 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
implementation of mitigation measures the project will minimize the adverse
effects of the project on conservation configuration and would 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.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
PACE 15 OF 11 b
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
MSHCP CONSISTENCY FOR RAMSGATE SPA 4 ET.AL.
PAGE SIX OF EIGHT
"-'
The TTM No. 34231 project site is separatedfrom nearby criteria cells by
existing residential subdivisions located within the Ramsgate Specific Plan.
Therefore, the urban/wildlands interface guidelines set forth in Section 6.1.4
of the MSHCP are not applicable.
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 applicationfor TTM 25475. This mapping is consistent with MSHCP
mapping protocol. The mapping is sufficient under the MSHCP and is
consistent with the MSHCP requirements. No vegetation mapping
requirements apply to TTM 34231.
8. The proposed project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines.
The TTM No. 25475 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 No. 25475 is therefore consistent with the Fuels Management
Guidelines.
The TTM No. 34231 site is separatedfrom nearby criteria cells by existing
residential subdivisions located within the Ramsgate Specific Plan.
Therefore, the fuels management guidelines set forth in the MSHCP are not
applicable.
9. The proposed project will be conditioned to pay the City's MSHCP Local
Development Mitigation Fee.
'"""
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
PAGE... 1h OF 1I h ~
"..--.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
MSHCP CONSISTENCY FOR RAMSGATE SPA 4, ET.AL.
PAGE SEVEN OF EIGHT
Conditions of Approval require that prior to the issuance of a building
permits the applicant pay the City's Multiple Species Habitat Conservation
Plan Local Development Mitigation Fee in effect at that time. The current
fee for residential development with a density of less than 8.0 dwelling units
per acre is $1,651 per dwelling unit. Residential development with a density
between 8.1 and 14.0 dwelling units per acre shall pay $1,057 per dwelling
unit at the present time.
IO.The proposed project overall is consistent with the MSHCP.
The City received a letter dated May 1, 2006, from Sarah Lozano, Western
Riverside Regional Conservation Authority stating that TTM 25475 is
consistent with the MSHCP from both a criteria and other plan perspective.
Because there was noformal LEAP requirementfor TTM No. 34231, the
City ensured the consistency of this project site with the MSHCP.
r"'
The City received a letter dated February 27, 2006,from Thomas B. Mullen,
Executive Director, Western Riverside Regional Conservation Authority
stating that projects within the Ramsgate Specific Plan are covered by the
mitigation program contained in that plan and accepted in anticipation of
the MSHCP being adopted and the agency permits signed. Mr. Mullen
concludes that the preservation of the mitigated lands for the Ramsgate SP
helped to insure that the permits were signed.
Staff GO~e1ir8 fha/The entire project is consistent with the MSHCP and
provides effective conservation on the project site to meet the biological
issues and considerations of the MSHCP.
11. There is no substantial evidence, in the light of the whole record before the
agency, that the project as revised may have significant effect on the
environment.
SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date
of its passage and adoption.
~
AGENDA lTEM NO. 3-
PAGE 31 ~
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
MSHCP CONSISTENCY FOR RAMS GATE SPA 4, ET.AL.
PAGE EIGHT OF EIGHT
"""
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this first day of August, 2006,
by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
Michael O'Neal, Chairman
Lake Elsinore Planning Commission
~
ATTEST:
Rolfe M. Preisendanz, Director of Community Development
"""
AGEICDA 1TEM reo. . :
PAGE 3~ OF lib
Jtf~ Lf-o .
".......
RESOLUTION NO. 2006- (p\"
~
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE APPROVAL OF RAMSGATE
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 89-1 FOURTH REVISION,
LOCATED APPROXIMATELY ONE MILE EAST
OF INTERESTATE 15, SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 74,
AND WEST OF GREENWALD AVENUE.
WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Lake
Elsinore by The Shopoff Group, 8951 Research Drive, Irvine, CA 92618, to
amend the Ramsgate Specific Plan No. 89-1; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore
has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to
the City Council pertaining to changes to approved specific plans; and
~
WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given, and the
Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community
Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing
held with respect to this item on August 1,2006.
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 proposed
Ramsgate Specific Plan No. 89-1 Fourth Revision prior to making a decision
to recommend that the City Council approve the proposed amendment.
Pursuant to Section 21080 (c )(2) of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA), the Planning Commission finds and determines that
Addendum No. 3 to the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report
for Ramsgate (SCH No. 88090525) is adequate and prepared in accordance
with the requirements of CEQA which analyzes environmental effects of the
proposed project.
/'""'
AGENDA ITEM NO.~
PAOE31 _OF.lU-
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
RAMSGATE SP 89-1 FOURTH REVISION
AUGUST 1, 2006
PAGE 20F4
....",
SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning law
and Chapter 17.99 (Specific Plan District) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal
Code the following findings for the approval of Ramsgate Specific Plan No.
89-1 Fourth Revision have been made as follows:
1. The location and design of the proposed development is consistent with
the goals and policies of the City's General Plan and with any other
applicable plan or policies adopted by the City, or in the process of being
prepared and adopted.
a. The General Plan supports the development of the Ramsgate Specific
Plan. The proposed Revision has been reviewed and conditioned. to
enhance and update the original Specific Plan.
b. The proposal has been designed to support the objectives of the Multi- ~
Species Habitat Conservation Plan adopted by the City, by preserving
habitat areas identified in the Conservation Plan.
c. A marketing analysis by DDS Marketing dated June 2006 determined
that there is insufficient households in the catchment area to support a
retail grocer.
2. The proposed location allows the development to be well-integrated with
or adequately buffered from its surroundings, whichever may be the case.
a. The proposed Revision integrates development of medium high density
residential, as a buffer between apartment development to the west
and the single family detached residential neighborhoods to the east.
b. The proposed Revision increases the variety of housing types offered
in the Ramsgate Specific Plan.
~
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
PAGE 46 OF 111.
"" RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
RAMSGATE SP 89-1 FOURTH REVISION
AUGUST 1,2006
PAGE 30F4
3. All vehicular traffic generated by the development, either in phased
increments or at full build-out, is to be accommodated safely and without
causing undue congestion upon adjoining streets.
a. The environmental review of the Fourth Revision indicates that traffic
generated by the proposed project will be significantly less than that
generated by the previously approved specific plan. Project trip
generation is reduced from 16,000 daily trips to 2,775.
~
b. The City of Lake Elsinore General Plan states that the objective of the
City is to "strive to maintain a minimum Level of Service 'C' at all
intersections during non-peak hours and Level of Service 'D' at all
intersections during peak hours to ensure that traffic delays are kept
to a minimum." Except for the intersection of River Road at State
Route 74 in the County, all intersections within the study area will
meet the City's level of service objective.
4. The Final Specific Plan shall identify a methodology to allow land uses
to be adequately serviced by existing or proposed public facilities and
servIces.
a. The proposed Revision has been reviewed and conditioned to provide
adequate public services to the site.
b. The proposed Revision provides recreational amenities, pedestrian
pathways, and open space for residents in the medium high density
residential development.
5. The overall design of the Specific Plan shall produce an attractive,
efficient and stable development.
~
a. The proposed Revision will allow the construction of a mix of
residential units within Ramsgate. Design Guidelines have been
included to establish a consistent design expression among site
ACENDA ITEM No.3. .
PAOE..!iL~
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
RAMSGATE SP 89-1 FOURTH REVISION
AUGUST 1,2006
PAGE 40F4
"""
planning, architectural and landscaping components while allowing
reasonable flexibility in design.
6. In accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), impacts have been reduced to a level of non-
significance, or in the case where impacts remain, a Statement of
Overriding Considerations is recommended for adoption to justify the
merits of project implementation.
SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the
date of its passage and adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this first day of August,
2006, by the following vote:
""'"
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
Michael O'Neal, Chairman
Lake Elsinore Planning Commission
ATTEST:
Rolfe M. Preisendanz, Director of Community Development
""'"
AGENDA ITEM t<<). 3
PAGE L{;;_ OF ll-b.
""
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
RAMSGATE SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 89-1 FOURTH REVISION
LOCATED APPROXIMATELY ONE MILE EAST OF INTERESTATE 15.
SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 74 AND WEST OF GREENWALD AVENUE
PLANNING DIVISION
1. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its
officials, officers, employees, and/or agents from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City, its officials, officers, employees, or agents
concerning the project attached hereto.
2. The City intends to file a Notice of Determination with the Riverside County
Clerk's office within five (5) business days from the approval of this specific
plan amendment by the City Council. The applicant shall forward to the
Planning Department secretary, a check made payable to the Riverside County
Clerk, in the amount of $914.00 to pay for the cost of such filing. This check
shall be received by the secretary no more than 48 hours from the approval by
the Council.
/'"'"'
3. The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP)
adopted for this project, as printed with the certified Addendum to the Final
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse
#88090525).
4. The applicant shall fund the implementation of the MMP through every stage
of development. The City shall appoint an environmental monitor who shall
periodically inspect the project site, documents submitted by the applicant,
permits issued, and any other pertinent material, in order to monitor and report
compliance to the City until the completion of the project.
5. The SPA shall comply with the terms of the Development Agreement and its
Operating Memorandums of Understanding by and between the City of Lake
Elsinore and the applicant.
Page 1 of2
/'"'"'
ACENDA ITEM NO. 3
PAGE 43 OF 1/ L -~
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
RAMSGATE SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 89-1 FOURTH REVISION
LOCATED APPROXIMATELY ONE MILE EAST OF INTERESTATE 15. .....,.;
SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 74 AND WEST OF GREENWALD AVENUE
6. The applicant shall sign and return an "Acknowledgment of Conditions" to the
Community Development Department within 30 days of approval.
7. The applicant shall submit 15 final revised copies upon approval of Rams gate
Specific Plan No. 89-1 if necessary to complete the processing of this
application.
(End of Conditions)
.....,
Page 2 of2
......."
AGENDA ITEM NO. f -3
PAGE.-!:l.!L- OF II h
",--...
q - 0 It?rweJ .
RESOLUTION NO. 2006- 69.
Uof Uvtrl-j~evr,f t'V/ spA-
F '. '1
\,\. ovV.f.h. r2:evL.1. 0 V) .
/
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP NO. 25475, REVISION NO.1, A SUBDIVISION
OF 132 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS
AND EIGHT (8) OPEN SPACE LOTS, ON
APPROXIMATELY 37.3+ ACRES LOCATED
WEST OF GREENWALD, EAST OF GRASSY
MEADOW DRIVE, SOUTH OF SCENIC CREST
DRIVE, WITHIN THE RAMSGATE SPECIFIC
PLAN, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NOS. 349-240-034, -038, -072, AND -075.
~
WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Lake
Elsinore by The Shopoff Group to subdivide 37.3+ acres of unimproved
property into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore
has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to
the City Council pertaining to the subdivision of land; and
WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given, and the
Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community
Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing
held with respect to this item on August 1, 2006.
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 proposed
Tentative Tract Map No. 25475, Revision No.1 prior to making a decision
to recommend that the City Council approve the proposal to subdivide
approximately 37.3 + acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space
lots. Pursuant to Section 21080 (c)(2) of the California Environmental
AOENDAITN NO.~
PAGE '-IS OF 1117
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475, REVISION NO.1
AUGUST 1, 2006
Page 2 of4
~
Quality Act (CEQA), the Planning Commission finds and determines that
Addendum No. 3 to the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report
(SCH No. 88090525) is adequate and prepared in accordance with the
requirements of CEQA which analyzes environmental effects of the
proposed project.
SECTION 2. That in accordance with State of California
Subdivision Map Act, and the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code the
following findings for the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 25475
Revision No. 1 have been made as follows:
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP FINDINGS:
1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and
improvements, is consistent with the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan.
The proposed subdivision is compatible with the objectives, policies,
general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan
(Government Code Section 66473.5).
~
a. The design of the proposed subdivision and density of 3.5 dwelling
units per acre are consistent with the Ramsgate Specific Plan Third or
Fourth Revision, and therefore with the General Plan.
b. The project proposes single family residential lots ranging in size
from 5,000 square feet to 12,156 square feet, with an average lot size
of 6,592 square feet, which is consistent with the SP.
2. The site of the proposed division of land is physically suitable for the
proposed density of development in accordance with the General Plan.
a. The General Plan encourages clustered development in order to
facilitate the conservation of identified wildlife corridors and habitat.
The project density and design is compatible with proposed or
approved maps to the north and east.
b. The map provides open space areas that protect the natural
topography and views.
....,
AClIiNDA ITEM NO.~
PAOiLjh ~
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475, REVISION NO.1
AUGUST 1, 2006
/"'"'- Page 3 of 4
3. The effects that this project are likely to have upon the housing needs of
the region, the public service requirements of its residents and the
available fiscal and environmental resources have been considered and
balanced.
a. The project is consistent with the City's General Plan. During the
approval of City's General Plan, housing needs, public services and
fiscal resources were scrutinized to achieve a balance within the City.
b. The map has been conditioned to annex into Community Facilities
District 2003-01 to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the
project on public safety operations and maintenance issues in the
City.
./""'
c. The map has been conditioned to annex into Lighting and Landscape
Maintenance District No. 1 to offset the annual negative fiscal
impacts of the project on public right-ol-way landscaped areas to be
maintained by the City, and for street lights in the public right-ol-way
for which the City will pay for electricity and a maintenance fee to
Southern California Edison.
d. The map has been conditioned to form a Mello-Roos Community
Facilities District to fund the on-going operation and maintenance of
the new parks, parkways, open space and public storm drains
constructed with in the development andfederal NPDES requirements
to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project.
4. The design of the proposed division of land or type of improvements is
not likely to cause serious public health problems.
a. Tentative Tract Map No. 25475 Revision No. J is conditioned to
comply with all development standards of the Ramsgate Specific Plan
Third or Fourth Revision. These standards have been prepared and
reviewed to benefit the public health, safety and welfare.
~
AGENDAntMNO. ~
PACE 41 ~
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475, REVISION NO.1
AUGUST 1, 2006
Page 4 of4
'-'
5. The design of the proposed division of land or the type of improvements
will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for
access through or use of property within the proposed division of land.
a. All known easements or requests for access have been incorporated
into Tentative Tract Map No. 25475 Revision No.1.
b. The map has been circulated to City departments and outside
agencies, and appropriate conditions of approval have been applied
for their approval during construction.
SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the
date of its passage and adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this first day of August,
2006, by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
'-'
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
Michael O'Neal, Chairman
Lake Elsinore Planning Commission
ATTEST:
Rolfe M. Preisendanz, Director of Community Development
"-'
ACiENDA ITEM NO. 3
PAGE '-f~ OF II b
/"'""'"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on APNs 340-240-034. -038, -072 and -075
PLANNING DIVISION
1. Tentative Tract Map No. 25475 Revision No.1 will expire with the expiration
of the applicable Development Agreement for Ramsgate and its accompanying
Operating Memorandum(s) of Understanding, unless within that period of
time a final map has been filed with the County Recorder, or an extension of
time is granted by the City of Lake Elsinore City Council.
2. Tentative Tract Map No. 25475 Revision No.1 shall comply with the State of
California Subdivision Map Act and shall comply with all applicable
requirements of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, Title 16 unless modified
by approved C~)llditions of Approval.
3. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its
officials, officers, employees, and/or agents from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City, its officials, officers, employees, or agents
,,- concerning the project attached hereto.
4. The City intends to file a Notice of Determination with the Riverside County
Clerk's office within five (5) business days from the approval of this map by
the City Council. The applicant shall forward to the Planning Department
secretary, a check made payable to the Riverside County Clerk, in the amount
of $914.00 to pay for the cost of such filing. This check shall be received by
the secretary no more than 48 hours from the approval by the Council.
5. The applicant shall provide to the Community Development Director within
30 days of approval, a final approved version of the project in digitized
format.
6. The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program (MMRP) adopted for this project, as printed with Addendum No.3 to
the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for Ramsgate Specific
Plan No. 89-1, unless superceded by these Conditions.
r-
Page I of 18
ACENOA 1TEM NO.. ~
PACE Lf1 OF lib
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on APNs 340-240-034. -038. -072 and -075
'-'"
7. The applicant shall fund the implementation of the MMRP through every
stage of development. The City shall appoint an environmental monitor who
shall periodically inspect the project site, documents submitted by the
applicant, permits issued, and any other pertinent material, in order to monitor
and report compliance to the City until the completion of the project.
8. This map must comply with the Development Standards and Design
Guidelines approved with the Ramsgate Specific Plan No. 89-1 Fourth
Revision (SP). Construction of the property is subject to all the Conditions of
Approval of the SP unless superceded by these conditions.
a. All lots shall comply with the minimum standards contained in the
residential Development Regulations contained in the SP, including
lot frontage minimums and comer lot requirements.
b. Where the SP is silent, Title 16 and 17 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal
Code shall apply.
'-'"
9. Construction on the property covered by this map is subject to the terms and
conditions of the Development Agreement and accompanying Operating
Memorandum( s) of Understanding for the Ramsgate Specific Plan.
10. The applicant shall sign and return an "Acknowledgment of Conditions" to the
Community Development Department within 30 days of the tentative map
approval by the City Council.
PRIOR TO FINAL TRACT MAP:
11. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Riverside County Fire
Department as specified in the Department transmittal dated March 8, 2006,
attached.
12. A precise survey with closures for boundaries and all lots shall be provided
per the LEMC.
Page 2 of 18
......,
AGENDA ITEM NO.~
PAGE.SO~
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
~ A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on APNs 340-240-034. -038, -072 and -075
13. The applicant's engineer shall coordinate the design of Scenic Crest Drive
with development of Tentative Tract Map No. 31370 at the direction of the
City Engineer.
14. The applicant shall identify and design a trail access from Scenic Crest Drive
to the Open Space Wildlife Corridor, that includes dimensions, type of
materials used, and conceptual interpretive signage to be installed.
15. Street names within the subdivision shall be approved by the Community
Development Director or designee prior to final map approval.
16. All of the improvements shall be designed by the developer's Civil Engineer
to the specifications of the City of Lake" Elsinore.
/""'
17. The applicant shall initiate and complete the formation of a homeowners'
association approved by the City, recorded and in place. All Association
documents shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded, such as
the Articles of Incorporation and Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions
(CC&Rs). The HOA shall be responsible for the maintenance of all open
space areas and maintenance easement areas. The HOA shall maintain or
coordinate with an appropriate agency approved by the Community
Development Director, for such maintenance.
a. In the event that the Homeowners' Association fails to meet its
responsibilities with regards to the maintenance of open space areas,
the Lighting, Landscaping and Maintenance District shall
automatically provide such maintenance and assess the HOA for such
servIce.
b. CC&Rs shall prohibit on-street storage of boats, motor homes,
trailers, and trucks over one-ton capacity.
c. CC&Rs shall prohibit roof-mounted or front-yard microwave satellite
antennas.
...---.
Page 3 of 18
ACiENDA ITEM No.3
PAGE ~J OF / 1 b
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on APNs 340-240-034. -038, -072 and -075
'-""
d. The developer shall provide landscaped areas on both sides of any
access roadways within the tract, and the landscaped areas shall be
maintained by the HOA.
18. All lettered lots shall be owned and maintained by the HOA or other entity
approved by the Community Development Director and so noted on the Final
Map.
19. The Final Map shall identify downslopes adjacent to streets as open space lots
maintained by the HOA or as HOA Maintenance Easements. These HOA
Maintenance Easements shall be planted, irrigated and maintained by the
HOA. Where such slopes are within MSHCP Conservation areas, the applicant
shall confer with the Community Development Director or his designee
regarding appropriate methods to re-establish natural vegetation, consistent
with the MSHCP Guidelines.
PRIOR TO GRADING AND BUILDING PERMITS:
'-""
20. Thirty days prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit to
the Community Development Department a burrowing owl survey for review
and acceptance by the City.
21. The City's Noise Ordinance shall be met during all site preparation activity.
Construction shall not commence before 7:00 a.m. and shall cease at 5:00
p.m., Monday through Friday. Construction activity shall not take place on
Saturday, Sunday or any legal holidays.
22. Upon violation by the applicant of the City's Noise Ordinance or Condition of
Approval # 19, applicant shall cease all construction activities and shall be
permitted to recommence such activities only upon depositing with the City a
$5,000 cash deposit available to be drawn upon by the City to fund any future
law enforcement needs that may be caused by potential project construction
violations and the enforcement of the City's Noise Ordinance and Condition
of Approval #19. The applicant shall replenish the deposit upon notice by the
City that the remaining balance is equal to or less than $1,000.
Page 4 of 18
'-""
AGENDA ITEM NO.~
PACE 5~:'~
/""'
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots.
on APNs 340-240-034. -038. -072 and -075
23. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall pay the City's
Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Local Development Mitigation
Fee in effect at that time. The current fee for residential development with a
density of less than 8.0 dwelling units per acre is $1,651 per dwelling unit.
24. The Ramsgate SP project area is not within a Redevelopment Agency
designated area.
25. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Lake Elsinore Unified
School District under the provisions of SB 50, wherein the owner or developer
shall pay school fees or enter into a mitigation agreement prior t~ the issuance
of a certificate of compliance by the District.
26. The applicant shall provide connection to public sewer for each lot within the
subdivision. No service laterals shall cross adjacent property lines and shall be
,--- delineated on engineering sewer plans and profiles for submittal to the
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD).
27. All storm drains are to be maintained in accordance with the cooperative
agreement with the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District.
a. The homeowners' association shall maintain water quality basins,
landscaping, and open space drainage.
28. The developer shall submit plans to the electric utility company to layout the
street lighting system. The cost of street lighting, installation, and energy
charges shall be the responsibility of the developer and/or the Association
until streets are accepted by the City. Said plans shall be approved by the City
and installed in accordance with City Standards.
29. The applicant shall meet all requirements of the providing electric utility
company.
~
Page 5 of 18
AlOENDA '5NO. 3
PACE 0 Of 11 L
I
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on APNs 340-240-034. -038, -072 and -075
"'"
30. The applicant shall meet all requirements of the providing gas utility company.
31. The applicant shall meet all requirements of the providing telephone utility
company.
32. A bond is required guaranteeing the removal of all trailers used during
construction.
33. All signage shall be subject to Planning Division review and approval prior to
installation.
34. Landscape Plans for the tract shall include vegetative screening of retention
basins and both sides of service roads and drainage easements.
35. Any alterations to the topography, ground surface, or any other site
preparation activity will require appropriate grading permits. A Geologic Soils
Report with associated recommendations will be required for grading permit
approval, and all grading must meet the City's Grading Ordinance, subject to "'"
the approval of the City Engineer and the Planning Division. Analysis of
impacts of fills and cuts greater than sixty feet (60') shall be provided. Interim
and permanent erosion control measures are required. The applicant shall bond
100% for material and labor for one (1) year for erosion control landscaping at
the time the site is rough graded.
PRIOR TO DESIGN REVIEW:
36. All future structural development associated with this map requires separate
Design Review approval.
37. Elevation drawings for Design Review shall include four-sided architectural
features for both the first and second story. The applicant may submit to the
Community Development Director or his designee, for review and approval,
evidence that a particular elevation is hidden from public view and not visible
due to elevation changes. In those instances, to be determined by the
Page 6 of 18
"'"
AC~~ 5~' 't ! IT,
/"'""
CONDITIONS OF AFFROV AL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots.
on AFNs 340-240-034. -038, -072 and -075
Community Development Director or his designee on a case-by-case basis,
this condition may be waived.
38. Slopes on individual lots that are in excess of three feet in height shall be
installed, landscaped and irrigated by the developer prior to the issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy.
39. Downslopes adjacent to streets shall be maintained by the HOA.
40. A detailed fencing plan shall be required for review and approval during the
Design Review process.
a. The applicant shall install walls and fencing along the perimeter of the
subdivision in accordance with the approved Design Guidelines for
the Ramsgate Specific Plan.
~
b.
Where views to open space are important, the applicant shall provide
the appropriate view fencing.
41. A detailed phasing plan shall be required for review and approval during the
Design Review process.
a. Construction phasing plans shall include the location of construction
fencing for each phase.
b. Construction phasing plans shall indicate primary and secondary access
and the location of all utilities for each phase.
c. Construction phasing plans shall be designed to avoid construction traffic
from entering occupied neighborhoods to the greatest extent possible. For
safety purposes construction phasing plans shall also be designed such that
new residents can avoid traveling through construction areas.
~
Page 7 of 18
ACENDA I1tMNO.~
PACE :55~
/
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots.
on APNs 340-240-034. -038, -072 and -075
.....""
42. Primary and secondary access roads for each phase as identified on the map
"Fire Access Table" shall be fully constructed and open to the public prior to
the issuance of the Certificates of Occupancy for each phase of the tract.
ENGINEERING DIVISION
General Requirements:
43. A grading plan signed and stamped by a Calif. Registered Civil Engineer shall
be required if the grading exceeds 50 cubic yards or the existing flow pattern
is substantially modified as determined by the City Engineer. If the grading is
less than 50 cubic yards and a grading plan is not required, a grading permit
shall still be obtained so that a cursory drainage and flow pattern inspection
can be conducted before grading begins.
44. Prior to commencement of grading operations, applicant shall provide to the
City a map of all proposed haul routes to be used for movement of export .....""
material. Such routes shall be subject to the review and approval of the City
Engineer.
45. All grading shall be done under the supervision of a geotechnical engineer and
he shall certify all slopes steeper than 2 to 1 for stability and proper erosion
control. All manufactured slopes greater than 30 ft. in height shall be
contoured.
46. This project shall comply with the recommendations of the traffic study
prepared by Urban Crossroads dated October 24,2005.
47. Provide Tract Phasing Plan for the City Engineer's approval. Bond public
improvements for each Phase as approved by the City Engineer.
48. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained prior to any work on City right-of-
way.
Page 8 of 18
'--'
AGENDA ITEM 'Z" 3 b .~
PACE .? Of. I /,
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
r- A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on APNs 340-240-034. -038. -072 and -075
49. Arrangements for relocation of utility company facilities (power poles, vaults,
etc.) out of the roadway or alley shall be the responsibility of the property
owner or his agent. Overhead utilities shall be undergrounded.
50. Underground water rights shall be dedicated to the City pursuant to the
provisions of Section 16.52.030 (LEMC), and consistent with the City's
agreement with the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District.
51. Applicant shall obtain any necessary County permits and meet all County
requirements for any work within County right-of-way.
52. The applicant shall install permanent bench marks per Riverside County
Standards and at locations to be determined by City Engineer.
53. Provide fire protection facilities as required in writing by Riverside County
Fire. The fuel
modification zone shall be maintained by a homeowner's association.
/'"'""'
54. Applicant shall pay all applicable development fees, including but not all
inclusive: TUMF, MSHCP, TIF and area drainage fees, subject to the
Development Agreement and Memorandums of Understanding in effect for
the Ramsgate Specific Plan.
55. Ten-year storm runoff shall be contained within the curb and the 100-year
storm runoff shall be contained within the street right-of-way. When either of
these criteria are exceeded, drainage facilities shall be provided.
56. All drainage facilities in this tract shall be constructed to Riverside County
Flood Control District Standards.
57. All compaction reports, grade certifications, monument certifications (with tie
notes delineated on 8 ~" x 11 II Mylar) shall be submitted to the Engineering
Division before final inspection of public works improvements will be
scheduled and approved.
.;--,
Page 9 of 18
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
PACE '57 L OF / / b
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on APNs 340-240-034. -038, -072 and -075
'-'
58. Up-slope maintenance along right-of-ways shall be maintained by a
homeowner's association.
59. All open space and slopes except for public parks and schools and flood
control district facilities, outside the public right-of-way shall be owned and
maintained by homeowner's association or other entity approved by the
Community Development Director.
60. All waste material, debris, vegetation and other rubbish generated during
cleaning, demolition, clear and grubbing or other phases of the construction
shall be disposed of at appropriate recycling centers. The applicant should
contract with CR&R Inc. for recycling and storage container services, but the
applicant may use the services of another recycling vendor. Another recycling
vendor, other than CR&R Inc., cannot charge the applicant for bin rental or
solid waste disposal. If the applicant is not using CR&R Inc. for recycling
services and the recycling material is either sold or donated to another vendor,
the applicant shall supply proof of debris disposal at a recycling center,
including verification of tonnage by certified weigh master tickets.
......,
61. Some of the improvements shown on the Map and/or required by these
conditions are located in the County of Riverside and/or private owned. The
developer shall be responsible for obtaining County and/or private permits and
approvals needed to complete the required offsite improvements.
62. On-site drainage shall be conveyed to a public facility, accepted by adjacent
property owners by a letter of drainage acceptance, or conveyed to a drainage
easement.
63. All natural drainage traversing the site shall be conveyed through the site, or
shall be collected and conveyed by a method approved by the City Engineer.
64. Roof drains shall not be allowed to outlet directly through coring in the street
curb. Roofs should drain to a landscaped area.
Page 10 of1S
'-'
AGENDA ITEM NO. ?
PAGE 5t OF (I h
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
/"""' A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots.
on APNs 340-240-034. -038. -072 and -075
65. Applicant shall comply with all NPDES requirements in effect; including the
submittal of an Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) as required per the
Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. The requirements of
WQMP may affect the overall layout of the project. Therefore, WQMP
submittal should be during the initial process of the project.
66. Education guidelines and Best Management Practices (BMP) shall be
provided to residents of the development in the use of herbicides, pesticides,
fertilizers as well as other environmental awareness education materials on
good housekeeping practices that contribute to protection of storm water
quality and meet the goals of the BMP in Supplement "A" in the Riverside
County NPDES Drainage Area Management Plan. (Required for lot of one
acre or more)
r--
67. City of Lake Elsinore has adopted ordinances for storm water management
and discharge control. In accordance with state and federal law, these local
storm water ordinances prohibit the discharge of waste into storm drain
system or local surface waters. This includes non-storm water discharges
containing oil, grease, detergents, trash, or other waste remains. Brochures of
"Storm water Pollution, What You Should Know" describing preventing
measures are available at City Hall.
PLEASE NOTE: The discharge of pollutants into street, gutters, storm drain
system, or waterways -without Regional Water Quality Control Board permit or
waver - is strictly prohibited by local ordinances and state and federal law.
Prior to Approval of final Map, unless other timing is indicated, the
subdivider shall complete the following or have plans submitted and
approved, agreements executed and securities posted:
68. Construct Little Valley Road per County Standard 104A (60'/40'). The
horizontal curvature shall be designed at a minimum speed of 35mph.
69. Construct Marrelli Road per County Standard 104A (60'/40') or as shown in
the map.
,,--,
Page 11 of 18
AGENDA ITEM NO. _ .~
PAGe5q~
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on APNs 340-240-034. -038, -072 and -075
'-"
70. Construct Scenic Crest Drive per County Standard 104A (60'/40') or as shown
in the map.
71. A portion of Scenic Crest Drive, from A Street to Grassy Meadow Drive,
shall be improved as a trail access to the Open Space Corridor.
72. Improve the west side of Greenwald A venue by constructing an additional
paved width of 20' per County Standard 102. Adequate transitions shall be
provided. Note: Should the existing structural section is found to be
substandard for a secondary road, the road improvements shall extend the half
width plus 12 feet, from the centerline of Greenwald Avenue.
73. Construct local streets "A" to "G" per County Standard 106A (60/40) or as
shown in the map.
74. The proposed temporary emergency/secondary access road shall be a
minimum of 28' or as approved by the Fire Department. '"""
75. Applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City for the construction of
public works improvements and shall post the appropriate bonds prior to final
map approval.
76. Applicant shall obtain all necessary off-site easements for off-site grading
from the adjacent property owners prior to final map approval.
77. Provide street lighting and show lighting improvements as part of street
improvement plans as required by the City Engineer.
78. Make an offer of dedication for all public streets and easements required by
these conditions or shown on the Tentative Map. All land so offered shall be
granted to the City free and clear of all liens and encumbrances and without
cost to the city.
Page ]2 of]8
'-"
AGENDA ITEtf NO. 3 ~
PAGEbO OFllh
,...-.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots.
on APNs 340-240-034. -038, -072 and -075
79. Applicant shall submit signing and striping plans for the required street
improvements and a traffic control plan showing all traffic control devices for
the tract to be approved prior to final map approval. All signing and striping
and traffic control devices shall be installed prior to final inspection of public
improvements. This includes Street Name Signs, No Parking and Street
Sweeping Signs for streets within the tract.
80. A Calif. Registered Civil Engineer shall prepare street and traffic improvement
plans and specifications. Improvements shall be designed and constructed to
Riverside County Road Department Standards, latest edition, and City Codes
(LEMC 12.04 and 16.34). Street improvement plans shall show existing and
future profiles at centerline of street, at top of curb and at centerline of the
alley. The profiles and contours will extend to 50' beyond the property limits.
81. All Public Works improvements shall be complied with as a condition of
development as specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) prior
___ to final map approval. The improvements shall include street and drainage
improvements, street lighting, and associated traffic improvements related to
the project.
Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit
82. If the grading is less than 50 cubic yards and a grading plan is not required, a
site plan that shows proposed project improvements and drainage patterns
shall be submitted so that a cursory drainage and flow pattern inspection can
be conducted before grading begins.
83. Submit grading plans with appropriate security, Hydrology and Hydraulic
Reports prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer for approval by the City
Engineer. Developer shall mitigate any flooding and/or erosion downstream
caused by development of the site and/or diversion of drainage.
84. Construction Project access and hauling route shall be submitted and approved
by the City Engineer,
---
Page 13 of 18
AGEN:~ i<~ II 10 ::
CONDITIONS OF AFFROV AL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on APNs 340-240-034. -038. -072 and -075
.....",
85. Provide soils, geology and seismic report including street design
recommendations. Provide final soils report showing compliance with
recommendations.
86. An Alquist-Priolo study shall be performed on the site to identify any hidden
earthquake faults and/or liquefaction zones present on-site unless a registered
geologist provides verification that the project is exempt.
87. The applicant shall obtain all necessary off-site easements and/or permits for
off-site grading, improvements, and/or drainage acceptance from the adjacent
property owners prior to grading permit issuance.
88. Applicant to provide erosion control measures as part of their grading plan.
The applicant shall contribute to protection of storm water quality and meet
the goals of the BMP in Supplement "A" in the Riverside County NPDES
Drainage Area Management Plan.
89. Applicant shall provide the city with proof of his having filed a Notice of
Intent with the Regional Water Quality Control Board for the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program with a storm water
pollution prevention plan prior to issuance of grading permits. The applicant
shall provide a SWPPP for post construction, which describes BMP's that will
be implemented for the development including maintenance responsibilities.
The applicant shall submit the SWPPP to the City for review and approval.
.....",
Prior to Issuance of Building Permit
90. All Public Works requirements shall be complied with as a condition of
development as specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) prior
to building permit.
91. Submit a "Will Serve" letter to the City Engineering Division from the
applicable water agency stating that water and sewer arrangements have been
made for this project and specify the technical data for the water service at the
Page 140f18
~
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
PAGE /; r;r- OF l( ~
-.
~
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on APNs 340-240-034. -038, -072 and -075
location. such as water pressure and volume etc. Submit this letter prior to
applying for a building permit.
92. Pay all Capital Improvement TIF and Master Drainage Fees and Plan Check
fees (LEMC 16.34).
93. Provide a traffic signal warrant analysis for the intersection of Greenwald and
Scenic Crest Drive. If warranted, the developer shall construct a traffic signal
at the intersection of Greenwald and Scenic Crest Drive.
Prior to Occupancy
94. Pay all fees and meet requirements of an encroachment permit issued by the
Engineering Division for construction of off-site public works improvements
(LEMCI2.08, Res.83-78). All fees and requirements for an encroachment
permit shall be fulfilled before Certificate of Occupancy.
~
95. All compaction reports, grade certifications, monument certifications (with tie
notes delineated on 8 1/2" x 11" Mylar) shall be submitted to the Engineering
Division before final inspection of off-site improvements will be scheduled
and approved.
96. All public improvements shall be completed in accordance with the approved
plans to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
97. Water and sewer improvements shall be completed in accordance with Water
District requirements.
98. Pay all fair-share contribution for the cost of offsite improvements as
identified in this project's Traffic Study, dated October 24, 2005. The fair-
share cost shall be based on a cost estimate of the offsite improvements
provided by the developer and approved by the City Engineer.
99. If warranted, the traffic signal at Greenwald and Scenic Crest Drive shall be
operational.
~
Page 15 of 18
ACiENDA IT~ No.3
PAGE ~3 OF) Lb
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on APNs 340-240-034. -038. -072 and -075
~
100. TUMF fees shall be paid subject to the Development Agreement and
Memorandums of Understanding in effect for the Ramsgate Specific Plan.
The TUMF fees shall be the effective rate at the time when the Certificate of
Occupancy is obtained.
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
101. Annex into CFD 2003-1: Prior to approval of the Final Map, Parcel Map,
Site Development Plan, or Special Use Permit (as applicable), the applicant
shall annex into Community Facilities District 2003-1 to offset the annual
negative fiscal impacts of the project on public safety operations and
maintenance issues in the City.
102. Annex into LLMD No.1: Prior to approval of the Final Map, Parcel
Map, Site Development Plan, or Special Use Permit (as applicable) the
applicant shall annex into Lighting and Landscape Maintenance District No.
1 to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project on public right- ~
of-way landscaped areas to be maintained by the City, and for street lights in
the public right-of-way for which the City will pay for electricity and a
maintenance fee to Southern California Edison.
103. Fire Station Impact Fee and Other Impact Fees: Upon completion
of the Fire Station Impact Study and other impact fee studies, developer
shall pay impact fee.
104. CFD for Park. Parkway. Orien Space and Storm Drain Maintenance:
Prior to approval of the Final Map, Parcel Map, Site Development Plan, or
Special Use Permit (as applicable), the applicant shall form a Mello-Roos
Community Facilities District to fund the on-going operation and
maintenance of the new parks, parkways, open space and public storm drains
constructed within the development and federal NPDES requirements to
offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project.
Page 16 of 18
""
AOENDAIm,~O.~~__
PAGE b., ~
~
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on APNs 340-240-034. -038, -072 and -075
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
105. The developer shall pay park fees of$I,600 per unit ($211,200).
106. The developer is required to participate in the "Public Facility" fee program.
107. The developer shall comply with all NPDES storm water requirements.
108 All interior landscape, recreation areas, facilities and/or open space shall be
maintained by the HOA. No park credits shall be given.
109 The HOA shall maintain all all park and common landscape areas.
110. The HOA shall maintain all natural and manufactured slopes.
~ 111. The HOA shall maintain all drainage facilities and structures.
112. The HOA shall maintain all catch basins, collectors, v-ditches or any other
related flood control or storm water control device.
113. The HOA to maintain all exterior walls and landscaping.
114. The developer shall participate in the City-wide LLMD.
115. The developer shall annex into LLMD District 1 for all exterior landscaping
to be maintained by the City.
116. The developer shall comply with all City ordinances regarding construction
debris removal and recycling, per Section 8.32 of the Lake Elsinore
Municipal Code.
117. The developer shall provide the City with an inventory of all street signs,
street markings, street trees and total square footage of all streets in a digital
format acceptable to the City.
/'"'"'
Page 17 of 18
r.GSI~"~~::$
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on APNs 340-240-034. -038, -072 and -075
.....,
118. Secondary access shall be clearly defined as part of the development.
119. The developer shall meet City curb, gutter and sidewalk requirements.
120. The City's Landscape Architect shall review all landscape and/or irrigation
plans prior to acceptance by the City.
(Riverside County Fire Department Conditions of Approval dated March 8, 2006
attached. )
(End of Conditions)
.....,
Page 18 of 18
.....,
ACENDA"", ~'_~
PACE~OF /) h
nHK-UO- c.UUO WW 11; jc. HrI K 1 V tiV r 1 Kt. t'lXt. r HlI NV. ~::> 1 ~::>::> 'moo
L6 - rtL zS'l7f
r. Uj
03/08/06
05:5~
/'""
1 :ary Conditions
Riverside County LMS
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Page: 1
10. GENERAL CONDITIONS
FIRE DEPARTMENT
10.PIRE.999
CASE - CITY CASE STATEMENT
DRAFT
With respect to the conditions of approval for the
referenced project, the Fire Department recommends the
following tire protection measures be provided in
accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or
recognized fire protection standards:
10.PIRE.999
MAP-#50-BLUE DOT REFLECTORS
DRAFT
Blue retroreflective pavement markers shall be mounted on
private streets, public streets and driveways to indicate
location of fire hydrants. Prior to installation, placement
of markers must be approved by the Riverside County Fire
Department.
~
10.FIRE.999 MAP*-#16-HYDRANT/SPACING
Schedule It fire protection approved standard fire
hydrants, (6"x4"x2 1/2") located one at each street
intersection and spaced no more than ~() feet apart in
any ~re tion, with no portion of any lot frontage more
than feet from a hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be
IOOe) GP for 2 hour duration at 20 PSI. Shall include
perimeter streets at each intersection and spaced 660 feet
apart.
DRAFT
SO. PRIOR TO MAP RECORDATION
FIRE DEPARTMENT
50.FIRE.999
MAP-#7-ECS-HAZ FIRE AREA
DRAFT
EcS map must be stamped by the Riverside County Surveyor
with the following note: The lanq division is located in
the "Hazardous Fire Area" of Riverside County as shown on a
map on file with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors. Any
building constructed on lots created by this land division
shall comply with the special construction provisions
contained in Riverside County Ordinance 787.
~
ACENDAITEMNO._ ~ ~
PACE 101_Of
nHK-Utl-~UUO WtU 11;jt ffil KIV ~U rlKt r~t
rHX NU. ~ol ~oo 4tltlo
03/08/06
05:51
Riverside County LMS
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Library Conditions
50. PRIOR TO MAP RECORDATION
50.FlRE.999
MAP*-#43-BCS-ROOFING MATERIAL
Ecs map must be stamped by the Riverside County Surveyor
with the following note: All buildings shall be
constructed with class "~" material as per the California
Building Code.
50.FIRE.999
MAP-#D-04-ECS-FUEL MODIFICATION
P. U4
Page: 2
.....;
DRAFT
DRAFT
ECS map must be stamped by the Riverside County Surveyor
with the following note; ?rior to the issuance of a
grading permit, the developer shall prepare and submit to
the fire department for approval a fire
protection/vegetation management that hould include but not
limited to the following items: a) Fuel modification to
reduce fire loading. b) Appropriate fire breaks according
to fuel load, slope and terrain. c) Non flammable walls
along common boundaries between rear yards and open space.
d) Emergency vehicle access into open space areas shall be
provided at intervals not to e~ceed 1500'. e) A
homeowner's association or appropriate district shall be
responsible for maintenance of all fire protection measures
wi thin the open apace areas. ~
ANY HABITA~ CONSaRVATION ISSUE AFFECTING THE FIRE
DEPARTMENT FUEL MODIFICATION REQUIREMENT, SHALL HAVE
CONCURRENCE WITH TUE RESPONSIBLE WILDLIFE AND/OR OTHER
CONSERVATION AGENCY.
50.FIREl.999
MAP-#46-WATER PLANS.
The applicant or developer shall furnish one copy of the
water system plans to the Fire Department for review.
Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer,
containing a Fire Department approval signature block, and
shall conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and
minimum fire flow. Once plans are signed by the local water
company, the originals shall be presented to the Fire
Department for signature.
50.FIRE.999
MAP-#53-ECS-WTR PRIOR/COMBUS
Bcs map must be stamped by the Riverside County Surveyor
with the following note: The required water system,
including fire hydrants, shall be installed and accepted by
the appropriate water agenoy prior to any combustible
building material placed on an individual lot.
AGENDA tTEM NO. c...5
PAGE W Of /1 b
DRAFT
DRAFT
"-'"
flliK-Utl-cUUO WtV ll;jc Hn KIV VU rlKt r&t
rH^ NU. ~ol ~oo 4tltlO
r. uo
03/08/06
05:5~
~ ..
I ~ary Cond~t1ons
Riverside County LMS
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Page: 3
50. PRIOR TO MAP RECORDATION
50.FIRE.999
MAP-#47-SECONDARY ACCESS
ORAFT
In the interest of Publio Safety, the project shall provide
an Alternate or Secondary Access(s) as stated in the
Transportation Deparment Conditions. Said Alternate or
Secondary Access(s) shall have concurrence and approval of
both the Transpork~tjo~ pe~artment and the RiverSid. e County
Fire Department. rctL Ittf/I(Jo&fJ ~'4.17 l)It)1SO 2...ID. ()~
80. PRIOR TO BLDG PRMT ISSUANCE
FIRE OEPARTMENT
SO.FIRE.999
MAP-#50C~TRACT WATER VERIFICA
DRAFT
The required water system, including all fire hydrant(s),
shall be installed and acceptea by the appropriate water
agency and the Riverside County Fire Department prior to
any combustible building material placed on an individual
lot. Contact the Riverside County Fire Department to
inspect the required fire flow, street signs, all weather
~ surface, and all access and/or secondary. Approved water
plans must be a the job site.
80.FIRE.999
MAP - SECONDARY/ALTER ACCESS
DRAFT
In the interest of Public Safety, the project shall provide
An Alternate or Secondary Access (a) as stated in the
Transportation Department conditions. Said Alternate or
Secondary Access(s) shall have concurrence and approval of
both the Transportation Department and the Riverside County
Fire Department. Alternate and/or Secondary Accesses)
shall be completed and inspected per the approved plans.
,--
AGENDA ITEM NO.3
PAGE 101 OF Jl h
i I ~:I!I ....
n. t Ii - i-.iI U
I (]) ~ g.~ '! I ~ -~ H. ~
I I 5 II I ~ ':-.. A:
.1 II I i ,I ~I H I ~:m .-:
I !i I !~ ~ .. H I ~1~111: .. ~ Ie
== Ii f I 'I ~ ~ i I. ! . i .-: 'i'
Ill:,' i I ! ~ I : II ~ II ~ig ~ ~
II.' I' ~. I ,Ig II~ll 2 c)
d Il:dl!! I!~ hdl'illJ ~ !:lh I"!ll 11!!:.t
.:...."" ..:....!!:!
I I I
I I
I . I I I
III I. Ii" il i
laill I-
~~ -----1' a!l;hl! i I
,'----- 1111
-,';;..'l ~ at
:~ I . I I Ii ,I!!
~
,....,;
iiiiii;a ~
9---- !
I
J.
',t. .
!!jII:1I I!
i
H~!-" ~ ;
I
I
-.-.11
I
- I.
......,
II
~
tw~'f()Ied tf--o
C~tvUU
~
RESOLUTION NO. 2006- (p t-
//
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP NO. 34231, A ONE LOT SUBDIVISION FOR
CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES, ON
APPROXIMATELY 13.81+ ACRES LOCATED AT
- .
THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF ROSETTA
CANYON DRIVE AND HIGHWAY 74, WITHIN
THE RAMSGATE SPECIFIC PLAN, AND KNOWN
AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 347-120-047.
WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Lake
Elsinore by MBK Homes to subdivide approximately 13.81+ acres of
unimproved property into one lot for condominium purposes; and
,- WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore
has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to
the City Council pertaining to the subdivision of land; and
WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given, and the
Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community
Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing
held with respect to this item on August 1, 2006.
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 proposed
Tentative Tract Map No. 34231 prior to making a decision to recommend
that the City Council approve the proposal to subdivide approximately 13.81
+ acres into one lot for condominium purposes. Pursuant to Section 21080
(c)(2) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Planning
Commission finds and determines that Addendum No. 3 to the Final
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 88090525) is
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
PAGEtt ... OF llb
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
AUGUST 1, 2006
Page 2of4
'-'
adequate and prepared in accordance with the requirements of CEQA which
analyzes environmental effects of the proposed project.
SECTION 2. That in accordance with State of California
Subdivision Map Act, and the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code the
following findings for the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 34231 have
been made as follows:
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP FINDINGS:
1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and
improvements, is consistent with the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan.
The proposed subdivision is compatible with the objectives, policies,
general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan
(Government Code Section 66473.5).
a. The design of the proposed map is for a one lot subdivision consistent
with the Ramsgate Specific Plan Fourth Revision, and therefore with
the General Plan. '-'
2. The site of the proposed division of land is physically suitable for the
proposed density of development in accordance with the General Plan.
a. The General Plan encourages clustered development in order to
facilitate the conservation of identified wildlife corridors and habitat.
The project density and design is compatible with the apartments and
community park under constructiorz adjacent to it.
b. The map provides open space areas that protect the natural
topography and views.
3. The effects that this project are likely to have upon the housing needs of
the region, the public service requirements of its residents and the
available fiscal and environmental resources have been considered and
balanced.
"-'
AGENDA ITEM NO..3 II
~E7;r OF b
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
AUGUST 1,2006
""' Page 3 of 4
a. The project is consistent with the City's General Plan. During the
approval of City's General Plan, housing needs, public services and
fiscal resources were scrutinized to achieve a balance within the City.
b. The map has been conditioned to annex into Community Facilities
District 2003-01 to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the
project on public safety operations and maintenance issues in the
City.
c. The map has been conditioned to annex into Lighting and Landscape
Maintenance District No. 1 to offset the annual negative fiscal
impacts of the project on public right-ol-way landscaped areas to be
maintained by the City, and for street lights in the public right-ol-way
for which the City will pay for electricity and a maintenance fee to
Southern California Edison.
,r-
d. The map has been conditioned to form a Mello-Roos Community
Facilities District to fund the on-going operation and maintenance of
the new parks, parkways, open space and public storm drains
constructed with in the development andfederal NPDES requirements
to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project.
4. The design of the proposed division of land or type of improvements is
not likely to cause serious public health problems.
a. Tentative Tract Map No. 34231 is conditioned to comply with all
development standards of the Ramsgate Specific Plan Fourth
Revision. These standards have been prepared and reviewed to benefit
the public health, safety and welfare.
5. The design of the proposed division of land or the type of improvements
will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for
access through or use of property within the proposed division of land.
a. All known easements or requests for access have been incorporated
into Tentative Tract Map No. 34231.
,r-
ACiENDA ITEM NO. 3
PN;Ef$ - OF II h
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
AUGUST 1, 2006
Page 4 of 4
.....,
b. The map has been circulated to City departments and outside
agencies, and appropriate conditions of approval have been applied
for their approval during construction.
SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the
date of its passage and adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this first day of August,
2006, by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
.....,
Michael O'Neal, Chairman
Lake Elsinore Planning Commission
ATTEST:
Rolfe M. Preisendanz, Director of Community Development
.....",
AGENDA ITEM NO. '3
PACE1~ OF n b
/""",
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81 + acres for condominium purposes.
on APN 347-120-047
PLANNING DIVISION
1. Tentative Tract Map No. 34231 will expire with the expiration of the
applicable Development Agreement for the Ramsgate Specific Plan and its
accompanying Operating Memorandum(s) of Understanding, unless within
that period of time a final map has been filed with the County Recorder, or an
extension of time is granted by the City of Lake Elsinore City Council.
2. Tentative Tract Map No. 34231 shall comply with the State of California
Subdivision Map Act and shall comply with all applicable requirements of the
Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, Title 16 unless modified by approved
Conditions of Approval.
r--
3. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its,
officials, officers, employees, and/or agents from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City, its officials, officers, employees, or agents
concerning the project attached hereto.
4. The City intends to file a Notice of Determination with the Riverside County
Clerk's office within five (5) business days from the approval of this map by
the City Council.
5. The applicant shall provide to the Community Development Director within
30 days of approval, a final approved version of the project in digitized
format.
6. The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program (MMRP) adopted for this project, as printed with Addendum No.3 to
the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for Ramsgate Specific
Plan No. 89-1, unless superceded by these Conditions.
7. The applicant shall fund the implementation of the MMRP through every
stage of development. The City shall appoint an environmental monitor who
shall periodically inspect the project site, documents submitted by the
,.,--.
Page I of 15
.wtD"lt9I~~~ ~
PAGE.:]J Of
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81+ acres for condominium purposes.
on APN 347-120-047
"""
applicant, permits issued, and any other pertinent material, in order to monitor
and report compliance to the City until the completion of the project.
8. This map must comply with the Development Standards and Design
Guidelines approved with the Ramsgate Specific Plan No. 89-1 Fourth
Revision (SP). Construction of the property is subject to all the Conditions of
Approval of the SP unless superceded by these conditions. Where the SP is
silent, Title 16 and 17 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code shall apply.
9. Construction on the property covered by this map is subject to the terms and
conditions of the Development Agreement and accompanying Operating
Memorandum(s) of Understanding for the Ramsgate Specific Plan.
10. The applicant shall sign and return an "Acknowledgment of Conditions" to the
Community Development Department within 30 days of the tentative map
approval by the City Council.
PRIOR TO FINAL TRACT MAP:
"""
11. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Riverside County Fire
Department.
12. A precise survey with closures for boundaries and all lots shall be provided
per the LEMC.
13. Street names within the subdivision shall be approved by the Community
Development Director or designee prior to final map approval.
14. All of the improvements shall be designed by the developer's Civil Engineer
to the specifications of the City of Lake Elsinore.
15. The applicant shall initiate and complete the formation of a homeowners'
association approved by the City, recorded and in place. All Association
documents shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded, such as
the Articles of Incorporation and Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions
Page 2 of 15
....."
ACENDA~"9-- ~ ~
f')A,(JE .:J..I;;:L-oF
,,-....
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81+ acres for condominium purposes.
on APN 347-120-047
(CC&Rs). The HOA shall be responsible for the maintenance of all open
space areas and maintenance easement areas. The HOA shall maintain or
coordinate with an appropriate agency approved by the Community
Development Director, for such maintenance.
a. In the event that the Homeowners' Association fails to meet its
responsibilities with regards to the maintenance of open space areas,
the Lighting, Landscaping and Maintenance District shall
automatically provide such maintenance and assess the HOA for such
servIce.
b: CC&Rs shall prohibit on-street storage of boats, motor homes,
trailers, and trucks over one-ton capacity.
c. CC&Rs shall prohibit roof-mounted or front-yard microwave satellite
antennas.
/"'"'
d. The developer shall provide landscaped areas on both sides of any
access roadways within the tract, and the landscaped areas shall be
maintained by the HOA.
16. All lettered lots shall be owned and maintained by the HOA or other entity
approved by the Community Development Director and so noted on the Final
Map.
17. The Final Map shall identify downslopes adjacent to streets as open space lots
maintained by the HOA or as HOA Maintenance Easements. These HOA
Maintenance Easements shall be planted, irrigated and maintained by the
HOA.
PRIOR TO GRADING AND BUILDING PERMITS:
18. Thirty days prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit to
the Community Development Department a burrowing owl survey for review
and acceptance by the City.
/'"'"'"
Page 3 of ) 5
aGENDA rmI NO. it.
PAGEll OF 17b -
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81 + acres for condominium purposes.
on APN 347-120-047
....,
19. The City's Noise Ordinance shall be met during all site preparation activity.
Construction shall not commence before 7:00 a.m. and shall cease at 5:00
p.m., Monday through Friday. Construction activity shall not take place on
Saturday, Sunday or any legal holidays.
20. Upon violation by the applicant of the City's Noise Ordinance or Condition of
Approval # 18, applicant shall cease all construction activities and shall be
permitted to recommence such activities only upon depositing with the City a
$5,000 cash deposit available to be drawn upon by the City to fund any future
law enforcement needs that may be caused by potential p:foject construction
violations and the enforcement of the City's Noise Ordinance and Condition
of Approval #18. The applicant shall replenish the deposit upon notice by the
City that the remaining balance is equal to or less than $1,000.
21. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall pay the City's
Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Local Development Mitigation
Fee in effect at that time. The current fee for residential development with a
density of less than 8.0 dwelling units per acre is $1,651 per dwelling unit. For
residential development with a density between 8.1 and 14.0, the current fee is
$1,057 per dwelling unit.
"WIJI
22. The Ramsgate SP project area IS not within a Redevelopment Agency
designated area.
23. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Lake Elsinore Unified
School District under the provisions of SB 50, wherein the owner or developer
shall pay school fees or enter into a mitigation agreement prior to the issuance
of a certificate of compliance by the District.
24. The applicant shall provide connection to public sewer for each lot within the
subdivision. No service laterals shall cross adjacent property lines and shall be
delineated on engineering sewer plans and profiles for submittal to the
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD).
Page 4 of ) 5
..",
AGENDAITEM?, 3 I
PAGE 1 OF I.h
~
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81 + acres for condominium purposes,
on APN 347-120-047
25. All storm drains are to be maintained in accordance with the cooperative
agreement with the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District.
a. The homeowners' association shall maintain water quality basins,
landscaping, and open space drainage.
26. The developer shall submit plans to the electric utility company to layout the
street lighting system. The cost of street lighting, installation, and energy
charges shall be the responsibility of the developer and/or the Association
until streets are accepted by the City. Said plans shall be approved by the City
and installed in accordance with City Standards.
27. The applicant shall meet all requirements of the providing electric utility
company.
"..--.
28. The applicant shall meet all requirements of the providing gas utility company.
29. The applicant shall meet all requirements of the providing telephone utility
company.
30. A bond is required guaranteeing the removal of all trailers used during
construction.
31. All signage shall be subject to Planning Division review and approval prior to
installation.
32. Landscape Plans for the tract shall include vegetative screening of retention
basins and both sides of service roads and drainage easements, if any area
constructed at the site.
33. Any alterations to the topography, ground surface, or any other site
preparation activity will require appropriate grading permits. A Geologic Soils
Report with associated recommendations will be required for grading permit
approval, and all grading must meet the City's Grading Ordinance, subject to
--
Page 5 of 15
ACENDA ITEM NO.~
PACE l'1 _OF---L.ll2.-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81+ acres for condominium purposes.
on APN 347-120-047
~
the approval of the City Engineer and the Planning Division. Analysis of
impacts of fills and cuts greater than sixty feet (60') shall be provided. Interim
and permanent erosion control measures are required. The applicant shall bond
100% for material and labor for one (1) year for erosion control landscaping at
the time the site is rough graded.
PRIOR TO DESIGN REVIEW:
34. All future structural development associated with this map reqUIres the
approval of Design Review No. 2005-24.
35. Elevation drawings for Design Review shall include four-sided architectural
features for both the first and second story. The applicant may submit to the
Community Development Director or his designee, for review and approval,
evidence that a particular elevation is hidden from public view and not visible
due to elevation changes. In those instances, to be determined by the
Community Development Director or his designee on a case-by-case basis,
this condition may be waived.
~
36. Slopes on individual lots that are in excess of three feet in height shall be
installed, landscaped and irrigated by the developer prior to the issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy.
37. Downslopes adjacent to streets shall be maintained by the HOA.
38. The applicant shall install walls and fencing along the perimeter of the
subdivision in accordance with the approved Design Guidelines for the
Ramsgate Specific Plan.
a.. Where views to open space are important, the applicant shall provide
the appropriate view fencing.
Page 6 of]5
~
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 .~-
PACE '7)0~
""
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81 + acres for condominium purposes.
on APN 347-120-047
ENGINEERING DIVISION
General Requirements:
39. A grading plan signed and stamped by a Calif. Registered Civil Engineer shall
be required if the grading exceeds 50 cubic yards or the existing flow pattern
is substantially modified as determined by the City Engineer. If the grading is
less than 50 cubic yards and a grading plan is not required, a grading permit
shall still be obtained so that a cursory drainage and flow pattern inspection
can be conducted before grading begins.
40. Prior to commencement of grading operations, applicant to provide to the City
with a map of all proposed haul routes to be used for movement of export
mat~rial. Such routes shall be subject to the review and approval of the City
Engineer.
""
41. All grading shall be done under the supervision of a geotechnical engineer and
he shall certify all slopes steeper than 2 to 1 for stability and proper erosion
control. All manufactured slopes greater than 30 ft. in height shall be
contoured.
42. This project shall comply with the recommendations of the traffic study
prepared for the Ramsgate Specific Plan, Tr254 79.
43. Provide Tract Phasing Plan for the City Engineer's approval. Bond public
improvements for each Phase as approved by the City Engineer.
44. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained prior to any work on City right-of-
way.
45. Arrangements for relocation of utility company facilities (power poles, vaults,
etc.) out of the roadway or alley shall be the responsibility of the property
owner or his agent. Overhead utilities shall be undergrounded.
----
Page 7 of 15
~:ii''; II to
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81+ acres for condominium purposes.
on APN 347-120-047
......,
46. Underground water rights shall be dedicated to the City pursuant to the
provisions of Section 16.52.030 (LEMC), and consistent with the City's
agreement with the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District.
47. Applicant shall obtain any necessary Caltrans permits and meet all Caltrans
requirements for any work within Caltrans right-of-way.
48. The applicant shall install permanent bench marks per Riverside County
Standards and at locations to be determined by City Engineer.
49. Provide fire protection facilities as required in writing by Riverside County
Fire. The fuel modification zone shall be maintained by a homeowner's
association.
50. Applicant shall pay all applicable development fees, including but not all
inclusive: TUMF, MSHCP,TIF and area drainage fees.
51. Ten-year storm runoff shall be contained within the curb and the 100 year
storm runoff shall be contained within the street right-of-way. When either
of these criteria are exceeded, drainage facilities shall be provided.
......,
52. All drainage facilities in this tract shall be constructed to Riverside County
Flood Control District Standards.
53. All compaction reports, grade certifications, monument certifications (with tie
notes delineated on 8 ~" X 11 II Mylar) shall be submitted to the Engineering
Division before final inspection of public works improvements will be
scheduled and approved.
54. Up-slope maintenance along right-of-ways shall be maintained by a
homeowner's association.
55. All open space and slopes except for public parks and schools and flood
control district facilities, outside the public right-of-way shall be owned and
maintained by homeowner's association.
Page 8 ofl5
~
AGENDA ITEM NO.~
PAGE ~r _OF --LJ..t2-
;""'"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81 + acres for condominium purposes,
on APN 347-120-047
56.
All waste material, debris, vegetation and other rubbish generated during
cleaning, demolition, clear and grubbing or other phases of the construction
shall be disposed of at appropriate recycling centers. The applicant should
contract with CR&R Inc. for recycling and storage container services, but the
applicant may use the services of another recycling vendor. Another
recycling vendor, other than CR&R Inc., cannot charge the applicant for bin
rental or solid waste disposal. If the applicant is not using CR&R Inc. for
recycling services and the recycling material is either sold or donated to
another vendor, the applicant shall supply proof of debris disposal at a
recycling center, including verification of tonnage by certified weigh master
tickets.
"..-
57. In accordance with the City's Franchise Agreement for waste disposal &
recycling, the applicant shall be required to contract with CR&R Inc. for
removal and disposal of all waste material, debris, vegetation and other
rubbish generated during cleaning, demolition, clear and grubbing or all
other phases of construction.
58. On-site drainage shall be conveyed to a public facility, accepted by adjacent
property owners by a letter of drainage acceptance, or conveyed to a drainage
easement.
59. All natural drainage traversing the site shall be conveyed through the site, or
shall be collected and conveyed by a method approved by the City Engineer.
60. Roof drains shall not be allowed to outlet directly through coring in the street
curb. Roofs should drain to a landscaped area.
61. The applicant shall comply with all National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System requirements in effect; including the submittal of an Water Quality
Management Plan (WQMP) as required per the Santa Ana Regional Water
Quality Control Board. The requirements of WQMP may affect the overall
layout of the project. Therefore, WQMP submittal should be made during the
initial process of the project.
"..-
Page 9 of 15
AGENDA ITEM NO.~
PAGE 13 _OF--1.J.J2.-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81+ acres for condominium purposes.
on APN 347-120-047
'-'
62. Education guidelines and Best Management Practices (BMP) shall be
provided to residents of the development in the use of herbicides, pesticides,
fertilizers as well as other environmental awareness education materials on
good housekeeping practices that contribute to protection of storm water
quality and met the goals of the BMP in Supplement "A" in the Riverside
County NPDES Drainage Area Management Plan. (Required for lot of one
acre or more)
63. Applicant shall provide BMP's that will reduce storm water pollutants from
parking areas and driveway aisles. (Required for lot of one acre or more)
64. City of Lake Elsinore has adopted ordinances for storm water management
and discharge control. In accordance with state and federal law, these local
storm water ordinances prohibit the discharge of waste into storm drain
system or local surface waters. This includes non-storm water discharges
containing oil, grease, detergents, trash, or other waste remains. Brochures of
"Storm water Pollution, What You Should Know" describing preventing
measures are available at City Hall.
'-'
PLEASE NOTE: The discharge of pollutants into street, gutters, storm drain
system, or waterways -without Regional Water Quality Control Board permit or
waver - is strictly prohibited by local ordinances and state and federal law.
Prior to Approval of final Map, unless other timing is indicated, the
subdivider shall complete the following or have plans submitted and
approved, agreements executed and securities posted:
65. Construct the traffic signal at State Route 74 and Ardenwood Way.
66. Improve the north side of Ardenwood Way by constructing a bus bay per R T A
standards and as shown in the map. Note: Additional right-of-way shall be
provided to accommodate the bus bay.
Page 10 ofl5
.~
AGEtlDA ITEM ~. ~
PAGE ~ =oF.1llz-
~
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81 + acres for condominium purposes.
on APN 347-120-047
67. Interior streets shall be privately maintained and shall have a minimum width
of 28 feet unless otherwise approved by the Fire Department.
68. The driveway entrance at Ardenwood Way shall have a minimum width of 28
feet and shall provide a turnaround area. The gate shall be a minimum of 50
feet from Ardenwood Way.
69. Applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City for the construction of
public works improvements and shall post the appropriate bonds prior to final
map approval.
70. Applicant shall obtain all necessary off-site easements for off-site grading
from the adjacent property owners prior to final map approval.
71. The developer shall provide street lighting and show lighting improvements
(including along State Route 74) as part of street improvement plans as
required by the City Engineer.
/""'"
72. Conduct a traffic signal warrant analysis at the project entrance on Ramsgate
Drive and on Ardenwood Way. If warranted, the signal(s) shall be constructed
and operational prior to occupancy.
73. Make an offer of dedication for all public streets and easements required by
these conditions or shown on the Tentative Map. All land so offered shall be
granted to the City free and clear of all liens and encumbrances and without
cost to the city.
74. The applicant shall submit signing and striping plans for the required street
improvements and a traffic control plan showing all traffic control devices for
the tract to be approved prior to final map approval. All signing and striping
and traffic control devices shall be installed prior to final inspection of public
improvements. This includes Street Name Signs, No Parking and Street
Sweeping Signs for streets within the tract.
~
Page 11 of 15
AGENDAITEM~~
PACE :-Of--U-b--
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81+ acres for condominium purposes.
on APN 347-120-047
~
75. A California Registered Civil Engineer shall prepare street and traffic
improvement plans and specifications. Improvements shall be designed and
constructed to Riverside County Road Department Standards, latest edition,
and City Codes (LEMC 12.04 and 16.34). Street improvement plans shall
show existing and future profiles at centerline of street, at top of curb and at
centerline of the alley. The profiles and contours will extend to 50 feet beyond
the property limits.
76. All Public Works improvements shall be complied with as a condition of
development as specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) prior
to final map approval. The improvements shall include street and drainage
improvements, street lighting, and associated traffic improvements related to
the project.
Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit
77. Submit grading plans with appropriate security, Hydrology and Hydraulic
Reports prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer for approval by the City
Engineer. Developer shall mitigate any flooding and/or erosion downstream
caused by development of the site and/or diversion of drainage.
,...,
78. The grading plan shall show that no structures, landscaping, or equipment are
located near the project entrance on Ardenwood Way that minimizes sight
distance standards (design for 35 mph).
79. Construction Project access and hauling route shall be submitted and approved
by the City Engineer,
80. Provide soils, geology and seismic report including street design
recommendations. Provide final soils report showing compliance with
recommendations.
81. An Alquist-Priolo study shall be performed on the site to identify any hidden
earthquake faults and/or liquefaction zones present on-site.
Page 12 of 15
~
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
PACE <6b OF /1 L
,-.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81+ acres for condominium purposes.
on APN 347-120-047
82. The applicant shall obtain all necessary off-site easements and/or permits for
off-site grading and/or drainage acceptance from the adjacent property owners
prior to grading permit issuance.
83. Applicant to provide erosion control measures as part of their grading plan.
The applicant shall contribute to protection of storm water quality and meet
the goals of the BMP in Supplement "A" in the Riverside County NPDES
Drainage Area Management Plan.
84. Applicant shall provide the city with proof of his having filed a Notice of
Intent with the Regional Water Quality Control Board for the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program with a storm water
pollution prevention plan prior to issuance of grading permits. The applicant
shall provide a SWPPP for post construction, which describes BMP's that will
be implemented for the development including maintenance responsibilities.
The applicant shall submit the SWPPP to the City for review and approval.
,-.
Prior to Issuance of Building Permit
85. All Public Works requirements shall be complied with as a condition of
development as specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) prior
to building permit.
86. Submit a "Will Serve" letter to the City Engineering Division from the
applicable water agency stating that water and sewer arrangements have been
made for this project and specify the technical data for the water service at the
location. such as water pressure and volume etc. Submit this letter prior to
applying for a building permit.
87. No structures, landscaping, or equipment shall be located near the project
entrance on Ardenwood Way that minimizes sight distance standards (design
for 35 mph).
88. Pay all Capital Improvement TIF and Master Drainage Fees and Plan Check
fees (LEMC 16.34).
--
Page 13 of ) 5
AGENDA l1lM<t>d-
PACE Y---Ll.b-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81+ acres for condominium purposes.
on APN 347-120-047
~
Prior to Occupancy
89. Pay all fees and meet requirements of an encroachment permit issued by the
Engineering Division for construction of off-site public works improvements
(LEMCI2.08, Res.83-78). All fees and requirements for an encroachment
permit shall be fulfilled before Certificate of Occupancy.
90. All compaction reports, grade certifications, monument certifications (with tie
notes delineated on 8 1/2" x 11" Mylar) shall be submitted to the Engineering
Division before final inspection of off-site improvements will be scheduled
and approved.
91. All public improvements shall be completed in accordance with the approved
plans to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
92. All signing and striping and traffic control devices shall be installed. This
includes Street Name Signs, No Parking and Street Sweeping Signs for streets
within the tract.
""'"
93. Water and sewer improvements shall be completed in accordance with Water
District requirements.
94. The traffic signal at Ardenwood Way and SR74 and warranted signals at the
project entrance( s) shall be operational.
95. All open space, slopes, and flood control facilities, outside the public right-of-
way shall be owned and maintained by homeowner's association. Proof of
acceptance of maintenance responsibility shall be provided.
96. TUMF fees shall be paid. The TUMF fees shall be the effective rate at the
time when the Certificate of Occupancy is obtained.
Page 14 ofl5
""'"
AGENDAITEM~~.
PAGE c:g'b:OP:llb-
{.
CONDITIONS OF APPROV AL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81+ acres for condominium purposes.
on APN 347-120-047
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
97. Prior to the approval of the Final Map, the developer shall annex into the
Mello-Roos Community Facilities District 2006-5 to fund the on-going
operation and maintenance of the new parks, open space and public storm
drains constructed as a result of the development and federal NPDES
requirements to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project.
Applicant shall make a four thousand dollar ($4,000) non-refundable deposit
to cover the cost of the annexation process. Contact Dennis Anderson,
Harris & Associates at (949) 655-3900 x334 or danderson@harris-assoc.com
r'
98. Prior to the approval of the Final Map, the developer shall annex into Lighting
and Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 to offset the annual negative fiscal
impacts of the project on public right-of-way landscaped areas to be
maintained by the City and for street lights in the public right-of-way for
which the City will pay for electricity and a maintenance fee to Southern
California Edison. Applicant shall make a four thousand five hundred dollar
($4,500) non-refundable deposit to cover the cost of the annexation process.
Contact Dennis Anderson, Harris & Associates at (949) 655-3900 x334 or
danderson@harris-assoc.com
(End of Conditions)
~
Page 15of15
AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ rr-:
Pia <b1 OF _'
....II~ r . r..
, ~ !.iJ:
I; i~J!ill
I~IIII I.ln i I .
lili!C ~~'f
:slul fi ~Il ...
~I . Iii
. ; ;I~ i
I~ ~ t_.... ~J
- i , i~1111
;. i. ,'"
CD i.I.I.p'
~; 'I
· I J
e l:::",
.1 dIp
IIII ! q III'
11111'1,
IIlh.. II nil
. . .. '.0 II J · ·
I !
I..w., I' III
IUi.i ile . . .I'ldl'
IIIII m ' .: I
II n i 1'lilll-IUlI!
II-
~Wl'OJd
~--o
RESOLUTION NO. 2006- _
Ca
\.,../~
/""'
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2005-24 FOR
"TRIESTE" BY MBK HOMES, FOR 121 SINGLE FAMILY
CONDOMINIUMS WITHIN TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO.
34231
WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Lake Elsinore by
MBK Homes requesting Design Review approval to construct 121 single family
residential condominiums, including a 3-plan model home complex, swimming
pool, tot lots, barbecues and trail system within Tentative Tract Map No. 34231,
located on the southwest comer of Highway 74 and Rosetta Canyon Drive, east of
Interstate 15, and northeast of Ardenwood Way, and known as Assessor's Parcel
Nos. 347-120-016 and -022;and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has
been delegated with the responsibility of approving Design Review requests for
residential projects; and
",--..
WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given, and the
Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community
Development Department and other interested parties at a public meeting held with
respect to this item on August 1, 2006.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LAKE ELSIN.ORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE
AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the proposed
design for the 121 homes with 3-plan model home complex and has found them
acceptable. The Planning Commission has considered Addendum No. 3 to the
Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No.
88090525) for the Ramsgate Specific Plan No. 89-1, and the Mitigation Measures
thereto. The Addendum was prepared pursuant to Section 15164(a) of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. Appropriate findings
were made, and the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council
certify the Addendum.
",--..
AGENDA ITSI NO. . 3 J
PAOE 11 OF 110
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-_
PAGE20F3
SECTION 2. That in accordance with Section 17.82 (Design Review) of
the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, the following findings for the approval of
Residential Design Review No. 2005-20 have been made as follows:
1. The project as conditioned will comply with the goals and objectives of the
Ramsgate Specific Plan Fourth Revision, and therefore the City's General
Plan. The Specific Plan designates the site for Medium High Density
Residential (15 dwellings per acre), and the Design Review proposes 8.8
dwelling units per acre.
2. The project complies with the design directives of Ramsgate Specific Plan
No. 89-1 Fourth Revision and those pertinent directives contained in Section
17.82.060 and all other applicable provisions of the City Municipal Code.
Staff has reviewed the project with adjacent neighborhoods and finds that it
complements their quality of construction, provides a pleasing use of color
and materials, demonstrates a respect for privacy and views, and offers
visually attractive landscaping and open space amenities to its residents.
3. Conditions and safeguards pursuant to Section 17.82.070, including
guarantees and evidence of compliance with conditions, have been
incorporated into the approval of the subject project to ensure development of
the property in accordance with the objectives of this Chapter and the
planning district in which the site is located. Staff has provided conditions
regarding architectural design, landscaping, phasing, and fencing.
SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its
passage and adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this first day of August, 2006,
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
~
~
~
AGEHDAI1EMNO. I 3~
PAGE qJ- OF
,......
,......
,......
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-_
PAGE30F3
ATTEST:
Rolfe Preisendanz
Director of Community Development
Michael O'Neal, Chairman
City of Lake Elsinore
~;1j.-~JJ~ ~
-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT NO. 2005-
24, MBK HOMES "TRIESTE" @ RAMSGATE, IN TRACT MAP 34231 'w1f/I
PLANNING DIVISION
(Note: Fees listed in the Conditions of Approval are the best estimates available at
the time of approval. The exact fee amounts will be reviewed at the time of
building permit issuance and may be revised.)
I. Approval Expiration. Design Review approval for Residential Project No. R
2005-24 will lapse and be void unless a building permit is issued within one (1)
year of the Planning Commission approval date. The Community Development
Director may grant an extension of time for up to one (1) year prior to the
expiration of the initial Design Review. An application for a time extension and
required fee shall be submitted a minimum of one (I) month prior to the
expiration date.
2. Indemnitv. The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City,
its officials, officers, employees, and/or agents from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City, its officials, officers, employees, or agents ......"
concerning the project attached hereto.
3. Notice Filin!!. The City intends to file a Notice of Determination with the
Riverside County Clerk's office within five business days from the approval of
this Design Review by the Planning Commission.
4. Revision to Plans. All site improvements shall be constructed as indicated on
the approved plotting plan and building elevations or as specified by these
Conditions of Approval. Any other revisions to the approved plotting plan or
building elevations shall be subject to approval of the Community Development
Director or designee.
a. All lots shall meet the minimum setback requirements of the Medium
High Density Residential Development Regulations of the Ramsgate
Specific Plan Fourth Revision. Where dimensions are missing on
conceptual plans, it is assumed that Precise Grading Plans will comply
with these setback requirements.
Page I of II
....,
ACENDA ITEM NO. L 3
PAGE 1r OF II h
/"" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT NO. 2005-
24. MBK HOMES "TRIESTE" ~ RAMSGA TE. IN TRACT MAP 34231
5. Use of Colors & Materials. Materials and colors depicted on the approved
materials boards shall be used unless modified by the applicant and approved
by the Community Development Director or designee.
6. Style & Color Distribution. Applicant shall submit, for review and approval
by the Community Development Director or his designee, a detailed Plotting
Plan prior to the issuance of building permits for each phase, which indicates the
style and color scheme to be used on each lot. Styles shall be evenly distributed
throughout the site. The identical product and/or color scheme shall not be
constructed directly across or adjacent to one another.
7. ADA Requirements. Applicant shall meet al~ American with Disabilities Act
requirements for access to the Model Home Complex.
8. Prior Approvals. Applicant shall comply with all requirements of the
underlying Tract Map No. 34231 and Tract 25479, unless superceded by these
conditions.
~
a. Applicant shall comply with all relevant Mitigation Monitoring
Program requirements as set forth in Addendum No. 3 to the Final
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SCH 88090525) for
Ramsgate Specific Plan No. 89-1. Applicant shall provide a
Mitigation Monitoring Program Report on a quarterly basis during
construction.
9. RDA: This project is not within a designated Redevelopment Agency Project
Area.
10.Hours of Construction. The developer shall comply with Chapter 17.78,
Noise Control, of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. In addition, construction
shall be limited to the hours of 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., Monday through Friday. No
construction activity shall be allowed on Saturdays, Sundays or legal holidays.
It is the developer's responsibility to ensure that contractors and subcontractors
at the project site comply on his behalf.
~
11. Violations. Upon violation by the applicant of the City's Noise Ordinance or
Page 2 of 11
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
PAGE q5 OF (1 b
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT NO. 2005-
24. MBK HOMES "TRIESTE" @ RAMSGATE. IN TRACT MAP 34231 ~
Condition of Approval No. 10, the applicant shall cease all construction
activities and shall be permitted to recommence such activities only upon
depositing with the City a $5,000 cash deposit available to be drawn upon by
the City to fund any future law enforcement needs that may be caused by
potential project construction violations and the enforcement of the City's
Noise Ordinance and Condition of Approval No. 10. The applicant shall
replenish the deposit upon notice by the City that the remaining balance is
equal to or less than $1,000.
12. Construction Trailers. A cash bond of $1,000.00 shall be required for any
construction trailers used during construction. Bonds will be released after
removal of trailers and restoration of the site to an acceptable state, subject to
the approv~l of the Community Development Director or designee.
13. Construction Phasine. Construction phasing plans shall be implemented to
avoid construction traffic from entering occupied neighborhoods within the
tract.
~
a. After occupancy of units in Phase 1, construction vehicles shall use
the secondary access driveway or "F" Drive to reach Phases 2 and 3.
b. Construction vehicles shall use "F" Drive to access Phases 5 and 6.
14. EVMWD. The project shall connect to sewer and meet all requirements for
water availability of the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD).
Applicant shall submit water and sewer plans to the EVMWD and shall
incorporate all district conditions and standards, including payment of
applicable water and sewer connection fees.
15. Garaees. Garages shall be constructed to provide a minimum of nine- feet- six-
inches by nineteen-feet-six-inches (9'-6" x 19'-6") of interior clear space for two
cars for a total interior clear space of nineteen-feet-six inches by nineteen-feet-
six-inches (19'-6" X 19'-6").
16. Walls & Fences. All theme walls are required to be coated with anti-graffiti
paint.
Page 3 of II
~
ACENDA ITEM NO. ~
PAGE q,b OF /I b
,,--
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT NO. 2005-
24. MBK HOMES "TRIESTE" ~ RAMSGATE. IN TRACT MAP 34231
17. Any retaining walls visible to the public shall match the interior masonry
block walls in color and style.
18. Construction drawings shall use clearly identifiable and distinguishable
symbols for the different types of walls and fences proposed. Construction
drawings shall be reviewed to ensure inclusion of these Conditions of
Approval.
19. Construction drawings shall indicate that wall returns and walls fronting the
street between residential units shall be constructed of masonry block, and
match up to project block walls or residential buildings in col~r, texture and
style.
20. Walls or fences located in any front yard shall not exceed thirty-six inches
(36") in height with the exception that wrought-iron fences may be five feet
(5') in height. Chain link fences shall be prohibited.
,,--
21. Construction drawings shall indicate the replacement of wood or block wall
with tubular steel view fencing on slopes.
22. Any tubular steel view fence installed shall be of industrial-grade material for
safety purposes.
23. Construction drawings for Interior Wood Fence shall comply with the City
Standard Drawing Exhibit 'A.'
24. A six-foot (6') decorative block wall shall be required along all side and rear
property lines of the subdivision in compliance with the standards in Zoning
Code Section 17.14.130.D. A "Wall and Fencing Plan" shall be submitted for
the entire project prior to the issuance of any building permits, subject to the
review and approval of the Community Development Director or his designee.
Through this review process, it shall be determined if any existing fences need
to be replaced. The applicant shall work with the existing adjacent property
owners to coordinate any necessary replacement of existing fences/block walls.
,,--
Page 4 of 1)
AGENDA ITEM NO. :;
PAGE 17 .OF 11 b ~
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT NO. 2005-
24, MBK HOMES "TRIESTE" @ RAMS GATE, IN TRACT MAP 34231 'will'
25. FMZ. The applicant shall abide by the approved Fuel Modification Plan for
Tract 25479, and all conditions of approval of said tract.
26. Four-sided Articulation. Full architectural treatments as depicted on exhibits
or conditioned by these conditions of approval, shall be required for both the
first and second story elevations. The applicant may submit to the Community
Development Director or his designee, for review and approval, evidence that a
particular elevation is hidden from public view, and in those instances, to be
determined by the Community Development Director or his designee on a case-
by-case basis, this condition may be waived. Elevations visible from the
community trail or as a result of elevation changes between homes will not be
considered for waiver of this condition.
27.Fire Department Primary & Secondary Access. The applicant shall consult
with the Building and Safety Manager and Riverside County Fire Department in
order to meet primary and secondary access requirements of that agency during
all phases of construction once combustibles are brought to the site. The ...."
applicant shall meet all applicable County Fire Department requirements for
fire protection of the project site.
28. Si2na2e. All signage shall be reviewed and approved by the Community
Development Director or his designee, and shall require the issuance of a Sign
Permit as appropriate.
a. Applicant shall install neighborhood entry monumentation and
landscaping prior to the first Certificate of Occupancy for both the
Ardenwood and Rosetta Canyon comers of the project. Construction
drawings shall include their location, size, identification, color and
materials, in compliance with the Design Guidelines of the Ramsgate
Specific Plan.
29. CC&Rs. The applicant shall initiate and complete the formation of a
homeowners' association (HOA) and provide to the City for review and
approval Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for said HOA, prior
to release of building permits.
Page 5 of II
...."
ACENDA IlN NO.~
PACE Cf<t ~
r---
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT NO. 2005-
24. MBK HOMES "TRIESTE" @ RAMSGATE. IN TRACT MAP 34231
a. All open space areas, picnic areas, tot lot, walking trails, maintenance
easements, detention basins and drainage facilities shall be maintained
by the BOA excepting underground storm drain pipes.
b. All BOA documents shall be approved by the City and recorded, such
as the Articles of Incorporation and CC&Rs.
c. CC&Rs shall prohibit on-street storage of boats, motor homes, trailers
and trucks over one-ton capacity.
d. CC&Rs shall prohibit roof-mounted or front-yard microwav.e satellite
antennas.
e. All lettered lots shall be owned and maintained by the BOA and so
noted on the Final Map.
"...--
Prior to Issuance of Building/Grading Permits
30.Acknowlede:ment of Conditions. Prior to issuance of any precise grading
permits or building permits, the applicant shall sign and complete an
"Acknowledgment of Conditions" and shall return the executed original to the
Community Development Department for inclusion in the case records.
31.Gradine: Ordinance Compliance. Applicant shall comply with all
requirements of the City's Grading Ordinance. Construction generated dust and
erosion shall be mitigated in accordance with the provisions of Municipal Code,
Chapter 15.72 and using accepted control techniques. Interim erosion control
measures shall be provided thirty (30) days after the site's rough grading, as
approved by the City Engineer.
32.Plancheck Submittal. These Conditions of Approval shall be reproduced upon
Page One of the Building Plans prior to their acceptance by the Building and
Safety Division.
.,.-....
Page 6 of II
AGENDo\ fIlM NO. ,3 U b ·
PAGE qL:j .OF _ __ _
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT NO. 2005-
24. MBK HOMES "TRIESTE" @RAMSGATE.INTRACTMAP 34231 ....,
33.UBC. The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Building
Division building plans that are designed to current UBC and adopted codes,
and meet all applicable Building and Safety Division requirements.
34. Trash Concrete Pads. Applicant shall provide a flat concrete pad or area a
minimum of 3'- 0" by 7'- 0" adjacent to each dwelling. The storage pad or area
shall conceal the trash barrels from public view, subject to the approval of the
Community Development Director or his designee.
35.Drivewavs. Driveways shall be constructed of concrete per Building and
Safety Division standards.
36.Buildin!! Addresses. The building addresses shall be a mInImUm of four
inches (4") high and shall be easily visible from the public right-of-way.
Developer shall obtain street addresses for all project lots prior to issuance of
building permits. The addresses (in numerals at least four inches (4" high) shall
be displayed near the entrance and be visible from the front of the unit. Care
should be taken to select colors and materials that contract with building walls ....,
or trim.
37.Meetin!! with Contractor. Prior to Building Permits the Construction
Supervisor shall meet with the Planning Division to review the Conditions of
Approval.
38.Landscape & Irri!!ation Plans. Landscaping Plans and Irrigation Details for
each plan shall be required, Typical Front Yard Plans and a Cost Estimate shall
be submitted for review and approval by the City's Landscape Architect
Consultant and the Community Development Director or Designee prior to
issuance of building permits. A Landscape Plan Check Fee and Inspection Fee
shall be paid for the entire project at the time of submittal.
Page 7 of 11
....,
ACEN:ei ~.; lib
l
r---
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT NO. 2005-
24. MBK HOMES "TRIESTE" @ RAMSGATE. IN TRACT MAP 34231
a. Street Trees. The applicant shall install street trees to match existing
street trees a maximum of thirty feet (30') apart, and at least twenty-
four inch (24") box in size. The applicant shall be discouraged from
using Canary Island Pine because they tend to grow too big in this
climate for street trees. The applicant shall be discouraged from using
Evergreen Pear because they are susceptible to fire blight in this area.
If London Plane trees are used, the best variety for this area is the
"Blood Good."
b. Sif!ht Visibilitv. Planting within fifteen feet (15') of ingress/egress
points shall be no higher than thirty-six-inches (36").
r-
c. Water Conservation. The landscape plan shall provide for ground
cover, shrubs, and trees and meet all requirements of the City's
. adopted Landscape Guidelines. Special attention to the use of
Xeriscape or. drought resistant plantings with combination drip
irrigation system to be used to prevent excessive watering.
d. Easements. Landscaping shall be shown and installed on both sides
of any drainage easements not within a residential lot.
e. Drainaf!e facilities. Particular attention shall be given to the
screening of drainage facilities from public view or adjacent
residences.
f. Downslopes. Down slopes adjacent to streets shall be planted and
irrigated by the developer and maintained by the HOA.
g. Model Complex. Appropriate landscaping shall be designed and
provided at the model site.
39.Xeriscape Demonstration. One of the proposed lots of the Model Home
Complex shall be Xeriscaped and signage provided that identifies Xeriscape
landscaping.
~,
40.LEUSD. Under the provisions of SB 50, the applicant shall pay school fees to
Page 8 of II
ACENDA ITEM NO. 3
PAGE {o/ OF IIt2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT NO. 2005-
24. MBK HOMES "TRIESTE" ~ RAMSGATE. IN TRACT MAP 34231 '--'
the Lake Elsinore Unified School District prior to issuance of building permits.
The applicant shall provide evidence that all required school fees have been
paid.
41.Park Fees. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall pay park-
in-lieu fees in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
42.Ground Mounted Equipment. All mechanical and electrical equipment on
the building shall be ground mounted. All outdoor ground or wall mounted
utility equipment shall be consolidated in a central location and architecturally
screened along with substantial landscaping, subject to the approval of the
Community Development Director, prior to issuance of building permits. If the
equipment is placed behind the fencing, landscaping will not be required. Air
conditioning and related equipment located in side yards shall maintain a
minimum of 3 feet of unobstructed, leveled clearance between the equipment
and the adjacent property line.
Prior to Final Approval
....,
43.Issuance of Occupancy. The applicant shall meet all Conditions of Approval
prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and release of utilities.
44.Painted Fencine. Prior to final approval, all wood fencing shall be painted or
treated with a high-grade, solid body, penetrating stain approved by the
Community Development Director or his designee.
45.Landscapine & Irrh~ation Installed. All front yards and the side yards on
comer lots shall be properly landscaped and irrigated with an automatic
underground irrigation system to provide 100% plant and grass coverage using
a combination of drip and conventional irrigation methods.
a. Bond for Model Complex. All landscape improvements for the
Model Home Complex shall be bonded for labor and materials for 2
years with a 120% Faithful Performance Bond prior to final
approval of the Model Home Complex. A paper bond shall be
acceptable. The bond will be released two (2) years from the date of
Page 9 of II
....."
AGENDA ITEM NO.~
PAGE 10 ;;:-_Of-11L
~
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT NO. 2005-
24. MBK HOMES "TRIESTE"@ RAMS GATE. IN TRACT MAP 34231
the last Certificate of Occupancy.
b. Phasine:. All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed within an
affected portion of any phase at the time a Certificate of Occupancy
is requested for any building.
c. Consistency with Approved Plans. Final landscape plan must be
consistent with the approved site plan.
d. Slope Landscapine:. All exposed slopes in excess of three feet in
height within the subject tract and within private lots shall have a
permanent irrigation system and erosion control vegetation installed,
as approved by the Landscape Architect and Planning Division, prior
to issuance of certificate of occupancy.
e.
Open Space. All adjacent Open Space areas shall be completely
landscaped and restored if graded, prior to issuance of a Certificate
of Occupancy for the adjacent phase.
/"'"
f. Landscape Bond. All landscape improvements shall be bonded with
a 100 percent Faithful Performance Bond for labor and materials
for two years from Certificate of Occupancy.
ENGINEERING DIVISION
The Conditions of Approval for underlying Tentative Tract Map No. 34231 shall
apply to this Design Review.
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
46.Prior to approval of the Final Map, Parcel Map, Site Development Plan, or
Special Use Permit (as applicable), the developer shall annex into Lighting and
Landscaping Maintenance District No. 1 to offset the annual negative fiscal
impacts of the project on public right-of-way landscaped areas to be maintained
,r--
Page IOof11
AG~Qjv ~ 11),: '
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT NO. 2005-
24. MBK HOMES "TRIESTE" (iU RAMSGATE. IN TRACT MAP 34231 ......,
by the City and for street lights in the public right-of-way for which the City
will pay for electricity and a maintenance fee to Southern California Edison.
Applicant shall make a four thousand five hundred dollar ($4,500) non-
refundable deposit to cover the cost of the annexation process. Contact Dennis
Anderson, Harris & Associates at (949) 655-3900 Extension 334 or
danderson@harris-assoc.com.
.....,
Page II of II
......,
AGENDA I1!M NO. , 3
PAGE I OLf .... OF 1I b
-
~ I
0. I
w ;
~~ ~
~tI) ~ I
~I~wgll
~~il 'Ii
..J fij =1= iii 0 fi
3 Ww:Z: 1l!
AGENDA lTEl"eNOs' ~--~f) I = IE ~ ~ ~ i ~~
PAGE 1_ vr:::t \ ~.1 -
!
~~
Ii \1!~--4! .! a;;
". f:,
1't j.....-- \-
I
'I ~'r: -. ~r.-
. ~\ ~ /'~;ir .~
-.1-;' "I
"~ H.
i
~ /' ,
~ ~ l _ \ j
t
III ~
l
I r!
I ~
I ..
!I'
I~
I
~
~
Ib!h!J
g :3
-:>
lilb&!J
I~
!I;I .!illl
I iiii .lii~ III i5tt
I ~~~lIkld In
11 r _1"4 la 10
1""-=': ',"\.-;
II '
~. .. .
~'_..: .'
I
!
I
~I
i i~
~R n
II~ ft
~d UI
I I
~! Ii
It ~I
~i !
~i ~
i
EXHIBrr
l B
.
i '
~g
z
I I I~
e!1 ell
Ullil
~~ ~!I
z
~
0-
W
0-
c:(
()
en
o
a:
c:(
I
i~11111
i I Ilil ...."
e 1~lkl ~I,
..~~......
~
r!111111
~9~~~~S3
-
I ::.: N":-e
:ll:ll ~.. ..~
I CIll"!( or ::: ft ~
~ fot ~ = '" .,~
~. f.,
I I. l! Z
1-%"%'1'
f % Z
~
;....~.t;&
~
l1!!::!l
~
<-0
=
=
C'.J
= 0
[b!b!]." C'J
/'
,g --
l1!!::!l
~
.,~'
,.
b
~"
.:f~'~,
~ .
~~.
~~,
-j7'
AGENDA ITIM NO. 3
pAGE I 61, OF
UJ
O:::z
00
z_
- C/J
C/J_
-':>
UJ-
e:>
~~
<cZ
-,-
z
U-z
0"",
j:::c:
C3
...."
~
'\9
\)
\
, .....
\1 ~
cl
~
;~
" ~.'ilD
'-)
~
4J'
/"
.LU
~ !
J I ;
II ~ (1\ ~;I 1
I i I IL ."11,
!, Ifhi bl, h~ "I~I d
· 19f · f I ~
f .1/ II!I n I
~ Utll d: it i
! IUI! 111 ~I' ~
~ ~
Iii
ndll~ ~~l< itll~~1 P h
~~ ! ;~I ~!mIUI!llIibmlli~ihd
~~
;~
I ~ Ii ~ Ii
l II illlll~ll! !11l!~d!1 11111
! Idbdldl lI;mb Ii
i
I;!II! ;~!II! !llll
; uhHlul1 ; Lu i
~ ~ l!!
III illillillllll! Ilil ;!IIIII!!11ll1 ;
.. · -.e
In' I f
;~!tl u~ H~
litH nihil
i l
II !
II~B
j!i, I
illnl
.
~~
z
-"-->'--, . "',~------_// ~~/:-,/I
"<'~ " ~- ----/ /;;>/
'<>, "F ." v;:;/-
''<:~~?:/
It'
~ ~
Ii !(
<Ii~
:I: 0
on.
,..~n.
-z
Ii,..-
""J
n..,~
~h
~zE
,,<g
z~-<
z
:3
0-
W
0-
c(
~ u
en
0
~.. \J) z
~ :3
I
......
\
~
~
~
f:= ~
('rt! 0.
<:~U
,'""- W
":c !:: w
@ ~~ ~ i
cCc( u1' ii:
Z a: ~ a: !S~!9
--...,. 0 oc
:Ew~~ ~g~
..J ti ~ irl o~~
W W::E w ::co~
a:a:I-~ ~~!Z
0.1-1-.J ~~8
I
a::
;
;
I--Ifi
~tu
.,~
~.,
<.,
-i'"
III
Ii
<
~
g
('
~
I m Ii
11~1'1' h I ll~ I I ~ '"II JI
. ~IIII . ILl c .111 1,I.l I
; ; :; rlJ!
I ~ t! ~ !! I ~ I ~ II ~ :
! lllliil! " d! U! W ~I U ; :
e SlI ~
.
@;g
z
rG=
I
111111 ; II II I IllS II' I ~~ I SI
I 1IIIIIIIIIn IlIh ~ 11111. . 11111.11 . III kill,
~ ,...
11111111111111111111111 ~ IIII~,
o 0 0 0 0
~
~
~
,
1I
,,=-
J;;ii.~~~
{:'";;<;f,\
tL~,!~
~'~~-
~:!:
I,,'l;/~~
c:;>""
W
AOENDA'191 NO. .3
GE
z
::i
a..
UJ
a..
<(
o
If
C.
<(
--1
o
a:::
<(
, ~
a:::
~
o
o
--1
<(
o
c::
~
~ I
Q. I
W I
~i ~
~cn c1 !
~~c>>!!f~ w
:i-~il'
irl~=; 0 ~
.. lE~~~ ;~I I
g
-t;. .'
~~J
...4~' It
~ ..
..
~
~-~
N
~.e
~
o
~-
'"
I
ci
UJ .!!
% ~
0
Cl
Z ~
C ~
-' '"
0. .
.
f
'"
r"-
i ","
I
I '
~ LU
c.o O:::z
~ c:::> 00
~ z_
-en
en_
.......>
LU-
= 0 C>
~<.?
I!:!!:!I N ..: z
.......-
u-Z
-' O~
~ >- -'
-- I- D.,
0
/""'
i;
!~
T I j~~ K
/""' Po. i i !
-0I'l I"- !)
~ :2'"
8 !::;-
ti ~ i.
.~
1$
~ .. .
.
fi: g
j f
'(
~
I ~
ii' o~
e;
0'-. ~.
"E
t N
U
w
a:
0
z
-
CJ) IIJ
....I
W w
EJ ~ W
:lI::
0 c(
....I
I
I w
~ I-
~ IIJ
m w
-
~ a:
~ I-
\ K' I'J 1 AGENDA Il91 /10. . (
r- II b-
0-' -~
~J-\~~ ~ ~~ I.
Ii I PAGE 101 OF
g
~ 'i w
; ~ a:
l f ~ 0
" S
. " z
~ ~ ~ CIJ -
I ! ~ C/)
If ;i ..J
~ ~ W w
i ~
~ w
! lIl::
0 0(
: ..J
~
! I
~
w ~
:t ~
C/)
m w
-
~ a:
~
J
K:t.i:! \.i! ~ il
~~....,.,.
Ii U .
I K '
tR..~7
I
~
UJ ]
z
o ~
.
z .~
0( -<
..J ..
a. e
"
~
.
'"
II
. ,
..
~!
i;
.
~
~ I
.;
0 ,g
~ Ii
I- 'ii
Cl
% :
<
~ ..
-' .
IL .
2
"
~
.
:II
--1 j ~ ~
p.. Ii" Ii"
0.'"
p,::\Or-
r- 00
: ~ ~
1;; ~
'\ ~
r-
~
"B
!
@
I
I
:f ~;rgg
.. -..
\~~' D
i
~
\ K I
"'i7~
" il
U i
~
~.~
p,::8
~~
~
frl
CI)
~
l
~l
Ij
Ii
.
J
W
IE:
o
Z
\
I
l
-
(f)'"
....
WIJI
~~
O~
I
III
~ I-
",
1m IJI,
3 -
1~ ~ :: 3
NiEN:":i rr~Ofyr;-=
rr=\ ,"'~ r"
t ."'~ .~" ,~n'''''''-
I:~~. w:r.:r:..,~; t k~'~ m ~
'1\
~ ~
~ !D ~
I ~ " a:
~ .:::: I-
~ AGEN~A(tEtI1NO. '.~
PAGEJ /5 Jlb--
o
"
i .
~ g
i i
.
!
~
.
~
~
~
~
<
o
I
<
l
o
Ii
~
i
,
'-I1J7
I ""'"
ci
0 .:
== ~
I-
Z ~
<
0( <OS
..I .
D.. .
g
"
~
::r
~
~
~l
i.
i:
.
I
,
."wIII'
W
II:
o
z
en C/)
..I
W W
~ W
~
o ~
I
'-'
j~~
N'i:' -. ll.", ....
!j' ~~:!:
M' 8-'"
s:.
~; Ii S
18- J Cl g
~~ ~
t ~
~
~
j~ ~
i.
.. ~-~ .1
Ol) if
Slil ~ I.
o. .
8'~
.- t
. ~ }
-
u::
~
/"'"',
o
"",
.. ~ ~
o~
t;j-
,.,:!
1:
~
"
o
U
,
I
I
I
I
L -----
~
s~
8,~
~..
~'I>
I
I
----~
f'=\:,r.~ r r: ~17~
I>"'" ',' ,......~" ,- k,"'\ ij.'
~# '\;. ~. .....c ~ db; G
\K I 5' ~ I
~.... ' f?
I
I
.
WJ g
III -:
.~ l'
3: ~
t- I
z ...
c( 4
...I :
o
~ ~
. '"
~
.
:::Il
III
a:
o
z
CJ) ;;;
W ...J
III
~ III
~
Oc(
...J
I
~ ~
fI>
In III
~ ~
I
AGEJIDA..;i i3 '~ 1/ J, t
lIt~
~",q ~rCHj! .
E.'';;',."",.."""..!.
' '. li"'~ii _
,r=J'~ c ~ ti '.'.--
'f<
,
I
I
I
C
&1J1
JC:
I ~
0
W .!l
W ~
a::
::t: 'S
I- :;
."
Z ..
<C .
..J .
0
11. <;
*
~
::l!
~
g
ii
4'
~;
;~
.'
c
i
,;
~
w
a::
o
z
(/) (ij
W ~
~ ~
o ~
I
w ~
~ :;;
lD W
a::
~ I- 3........-
AGENDA i I~. ~F-Llb-
PAGE
,..-.
,..-
,..-
rr- 'f' ~ l' ~ S'" m........
'l"'"" i ~ fJ~,..,~ ~ ,00,.,1 n
t'..::....O.\,!i [oi.J B a
\ K'
7.:J
~
~
w
~
o
rn !
w ~
~ :
o :
I ~
~ ~ENDAI.TEM NO.~.
~ ~ PAGE 110 ~OF..JJ..k-
i
H P J ~
.~J2R;yll iJ~ i r
!i'ii ~ i'~tIP ~IJi II I
; Ilulllll Ii ; ioU ; hl~11
I ~! lib Ii I' ! I II fl III
;,! llilllhlllll! 1m i: lnlu
.. . ~
l/\/~O V
~
~
Ct::
Q
N
[ ~
..J
W
C
0-
~w
...::;~ ~
><!) ..r
a: Cf.) < ~
<~ 0
- Zc(CJ)uld~r
a:,....a:: !;:j",,~
--~o c
3 :Ew&O~ 13gf:
:JI-(\I~ ~...~
NieNDA,-NO. 1T0 -wf3;: ~~~
-PAGE Of II - ~ ~ ~ s ~ ~~
t ~ i I
q'll~ >.a iq Id ~ ~ I.
f , I>b! xi!ih.! it !
~! ! ~u l duUhUi!~lt~!ml
n
Ii
.1 !f 1 ~11!ill!III.IIII!II~!IIII'
~ i dli I 199 dllllun h~
C-:J
C'.J
LU
C>::z
00
z_
- (/)
(/) -
.....J>-
LU-
LUCl
>c c..:>
<C z
.....J-
.....Z
OZ
<C
>- .....J
I- 0....
C3
~
~ !
"', :e
I~I i
"I~! !
~ 6
J:
@~
z
,
~
R.."...
~,:
R.;z:..a:m
t:'~'n.
L ;1"lJ
,;;~.; 101UiD
'-"'te,'"
]L;.
'.,~
."
. ,; 9
L.U
I
s
!
~
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
~
TO:
CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
FROM:
ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DA TE:
AUGUST 1, 2006
PREPARED BY:
LINDA MILLER, PROJECT PLANNER
PROJECT TITLE:
MITIGA TED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-
12, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03,
PRE-ZONING NO. 2006-04 AND ANNEXATION NO.
77 FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED ADJACENT TO
STATE ROUTE 7 4, EASTERLY OF TRELLIS LANE
AND THE RAMSGA TE (CENTEX) SPECIFIC PLAN
APPLICANT:
THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, 130 SOUTH MAIN
STREET, LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA 92562
~
PROJECT REQUESTS
· Mitigated Negative Declaration No 2005-12. The City of Lake Elsinore
intends to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for annexation
purposes only pursuant to Article 6 (Negative DeClaration Process) and
Section 15Q70 (Decision to Prepare a Negative or Mitigated Negative
Declaration) as established by the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA).
~
· General Plan Amendment No. 2006-03. The City of Lake Elsinore is
initiating an amendment to the City's Sphere of Influence (SOl) and General
Plan Land Use Map designations by changing the land use designations of
the subject property consisting of approximately one hundred fifty-four (154)
acres. The review and analysis ofthis General Plan Land Use Amendment is
pursuant to Government Code Section(s) 65350 through 65362, the Lake
Elsinore General Plan and Chapter 17.92 (Hearings) of the Lake Elsinore
Municipal Code (LEMC).
ACENOA ITEM NO. ~
PACE.... \ OF 33
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006 '-'
PAGE 2 OF 13
PROJECT TITLE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-
12, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03,
PRE-ZONING NO. 2006-04 AND ANNEXATION NO.
77
. Pre-Zoning No. 2006-04. Conforming and consistent to the proposed
amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map, the City of Lake Elsinore is
also initiating an application to change the Zoning (Pre-Zoning) of the
subject project area from the County of Riverside's zoning designations to
the City of Lake Elsinore's Pre-Zoning designations. The review and
analysis of the requested Pre-Zoning is pursuant to Government Code
Section(s) 65350 through 65362 and Chapter 17.92 (Hearings) & Chapter
17.84 (Amendments) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC).
. Annexation No. 77. The City of Lake Elsinore is proposing an annexation of
approximately one hundred fifty-four (154) acres from the County of
Riverside's jurisdiction but within the Sphere of Influence area of the City of
Lake Elsinore. The annexation has been initiated by the City of Lake '-'"
Elsinore pursuant to the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government
Reorganization Act of2000 (Government Code Section 56000-56001) and
the standards, policies and directives of the Riverside Local Agency
Formation Commission (LAFCO).
PROJECT LOCATION
The one hundred fifty-four (154) acre, irregularly shaped, Annexation area is located
adjacent to State Route 74 (SR-74). Forty (40) parcels are located south ofSR 74 and
four (4) parcels are located north ofSR-74. Trellis Lane creates the western boundary.
The southerly property line "zigzags" along the boundary of the neighboring Centex
development currently under construction and within the City of Lake Elsinore's City
Limits. The eastern boundary is just past the residential lots fronting Missouri Drive.
The central access road is Riverside Street. The existing County of Riverside General
Plan Designation is Very Low Density (VLD) and Commercial Retail (CR), and the
Zoning Designations are R-A-20,000 (Residential Agriculture) and C-P-S (Scenic
Highway Commercial).
.....,
AGENDA ITEM 4:
PAGE~OF~
~
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
PAGE 3 OF 13
PROJECT TITLE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-
12, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03,
PRE-ZONING NO. 2006-04 AND ANNEXATION NO.
77
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Project ResidentialN acantlCommercial C-P-S & RA VLDR & CR
Site 20,000 Coun Coun
North ResidentialN acant Very Low VLDR (County) &
Density (County) North Peak
& Commercial Specific Plan (City)
Ci
South ResidentialN acant R-A-20,000 Future SP Area 'F'
~ (County) & RR, & Ramsgate
MD (Ci S ecific Plan (Ci
East ResidentialN acant MD (Medium Ramsgate Specific
Densi (Ci Plan Ci )
West ResidentialN acant MD (Medium Ramsgate Specific
Densi (Ci Plan Ci
BACKGROUND
The land area of Annexation No. 77 is known as one of two "pocket" areas created by
the approval of the City of Lake Elsinore's Annexation for North Peak. The North
Peak Annexation was approved in 1992 pursuant to LAFCO Annexation No. 1991-43-
1, 5. At that time LAFCO approved the annexation with the understanding that the
pocket area annexations would follow the North Peak Annexation. The first of the
pocket area annexations was brought before LAFCO for approval on October 27,
2005. This Annexation is known as LAFCO Annexation 2005-50-1 (City Annexation
No. 71- Merritt Luster). LAFCO has conditioned final approval of Annexation No. 71
(Merritt Luster) on the submittal of City of Lake Elsinore's Annexation No. 77 to
LAFCO.
---
AGENDAJ.TEM 4
PAGE 2 OF =:S:')
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
PAGE 4 OF 13
PROJECT TITLE: MITIGATED NEGA TIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-
12, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03,
PRE-ZONING NO. 2006-04 AND ANNEXATION NO.
77
'-'
LAFCO suggests that Cities hold Public Meetings prior to processing annexations to
provide an opportunity for residences to comment and ask questions concerning the
annexation proposal. Staff held a Public "Outreach" Meeting on May 17, 2006 for that
purpose. Approximately 50 to 70 residences attended the meeting. The majority ofthe
questions were focused on the existing neighboring Centex Home development. Other
questions related to possible costs that could be assessed to the existing residences if
the Annexation were approved. Staff explained at the meeting that the only increase in
costs to the property owners associated to the Annexation would be a Street Lighting
and Maintenance District fee of$24.90 per year per home or $29.88 per acre for vacant
land. All questions were answered in a City letter sent to residents on June 19,2006.
This letter is attached as an exhibit of this report.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION(S)
""'"
The proposed annexation consists of one hundred fifty-four (154) acres that has been
previously subdivided into forty-five (45) parcels. Of the forty-five (45) parcels,
twenty-six (26) are occupied with rural type residential uses and a few commercial
uses, while the remaining nineteen (19) parcels are vacant. The parcels are owned by
many individual land owners. The land area ranges from relatively flat areas to hills
consisting of natural vegetation and substantial rock outcroppings.
The area is under the jurisdiction of the County of Riverside but within the City of
Lake Elsinore's Sphere of Influence (SOl) area. The Annexation process requires that
the City of Lake Elsinore approve a General Plan Amendment and Pre-Zoning
designations in order to establish a regulatory procedure for future development. This
process will concurrently remove the area from the City's Sphere of Influence and
place the area within the City of Lake Elsinore's city boundary.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03
The City of Lake Elsinore is initiating this amendment to the General Plan Land Use
Map as part of the Annexation process. Annexation will allow the City to change the '-'
AGENDA ITEM ~
PAGE ~ OF 3:>
,.-.
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
PAGE 5 OF 13
PROJECT TITLE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DE CLARA TION NO. 2005-
12, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03,
PRE-ZONING NO. 2006-04 AND ANNEXATION NO.
77
existing County of Riverside's General Plan Designation's of Very Low Density
(1 dwelling unit/.5 acre) and Commercial Retail (FAR =.3) to City of Lake Elsinore's
General Plan Land Use Designation of V ery Low Density (1 dwelling unit/2acres) for
the four (4) parcels identified as Assessor Parcel Numbers (APN's) 374-110-071,347-
110-074,347-110-075 and 349-400-034, Low-Medium Density (6 dwelling units/acre)
on forty (40) parcels and Medium High Density (18 dwelling units/acre) and Low-
Medium Density (6 dwelling units/acre) on one (1) parcel (APN 347-H*>-003).
. I 10 - 003
Staff has concluded that with single family residential uses approaching on two sides
of this project area, a continuation of the Low-Medium Density residential designation
would be acceptable. The Very Low Density designation was proposed on the northern
side of State Route 74 since the land area begins to rise, creating rolling hills from
State Route 74 which could restrict residential development to more rural type uses.
r--
PRE-ZONING NO. 2006-04
Prior to the annexation of the land area, the City Council is required to adopt a Pre-
Zoning ordinance to delineate the zoning that will apply to the property to be annexed
to the City (Government Code Section 56375 (a). Corresponding and consistent with
the proposed General Plan Amendment (referenced above), the City of Lake Elsinore
is also initiating changes from the County of Riverside's Zoning designations ofC-P-S
(Scenic Highway Commercial) on APN 347-100-003 and R-A-20,000 (Residential
Agriculture) on the remaining parcels to R-3 (High Density Residential District) and
R -1 (Single Family Residential District) on APN 347-100-003, RR (Rural Residential
District) on APN's 374-110-071,347-110-074,347-110-075 and 349-400-034, and the
remaining parcels to R-l (Single Family Residential District). The proposed Pre-
Zoning designations are pursuant to the regulations governing all applicable chapters
of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC).
~
AGENDA ITEM ~
PAGE 2 OF 33
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1, 2006
PAGE 6 OF 13
PROJECT TITLE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-
12, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03,
PRE-ZONING NO. 2006-04 AND ANNEXATION NO.
77
....."
ANNEXATION NO. 77
The Annexation is being initiated by the City of Lake Elsinore pursuant to the directive
of LAFCO. As mentioned, the North Peak Annexation approved in 1992 was
approved with the understanding that at a future time the City would annex the two (2)
"pocket" areas created by the North Peak Annexation. The larger of the "pockets" is
the current Annexation, Annexation No. 77. The second "pocket" is Annexation No.
71 (Merritt Luster/Centex - City Council approval December 14, 2004). Since
residential development slowed shortly after the LAFCO directive and the developers
of the North Peak project experienced financial difficulties, the processing of the
"pocket" annexations were postponed. Now, due to the recent surge in residential
development including the adjacent single family development known as Ramsgate,
this directive has become a priority. Approval of the Annexation will comply with the
LAFCO requests to "close" the "pocket" created by the previously approved and
conditionally approved annexations.
....."
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-12
As defined by Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines, an Initial Study was prepared in order to provide the City with information
necessary in determining whether an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative
Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration would be the appropriate necessary
environmental documentation and clearance for the subject project contained herein.
According to section 15070(b) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) a
Mitigated Negative Declaration was appropriate since it deemed that although the
proposal for the Annexation, General Plan Amendment, and Pre-Zoning of the one
hundred fifty-four (154) acres could result in significant effects, mitigation measures
were available reducing these significant effects to insignificant levels.
The Initial Study, Mitigation Monitoring Plan and Notice of Intent to Adopt a
Mitigated Negative Declaration was circulated to the State Clearinghouse for the
required thirty (30) day public and agency review period. The thirty (30) day review "-"
AGENDA ITEM 4
PAGE~OF~
~
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
PAGE 7 OF 13
PROJECT TITLE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-
12, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03,
PRE-ZONING NO. 2006-04 AND ANNEXATION NO.
77
period ended on June 3, 2006. No comments were received. The documents were
revised to accommodate a request by the owner of APN 347-100-003 to designate his
property to Medium High Density with a Pre-zoning of (High Density Residential
District) instead of the originally planned General Plan Designation of Low Medium
Density with a Pre-Zoning designation of R-3 (High Density Residential). A narrow
strip ofland will be designated Low Medium Density with a Pre-Zoning ofR-1 (Single
Family Residential District), consistent with the properties adjacent and across from
this narrow strip. The environmental consultant found that this change did not
constitute recalculating the documents.
ANAL YSIS
~
This proposal is limited to the action of Pre-Zoning the property and amending the
City's Sphere of Influence and General Plan to incorporate the site into the City's
boundaries. Pre-Zoning the property establishes a regulatory procedure that must be
followed for future development to occur, subject to future City of Lake Elsinore
approvals and environmental review. Therefore, Pre-Zoning the property does not
permit development of the property.
The State of California Government Code Section 56653 requires that an applicant for
annexations of parcels into the City of Lake Elsinore include a "Plan of Services"
report as a critical element of the annexation process. As required, the Plan of Services
Report (see attachment) provides a comprehensive evaluation of the existing municipal
services to the Project, as well as an evaluation offuture services upon annexation. The
report enumerates and describes the services to be provided, the levels of service
(LOS) and range of those services, the feasibility of extending such services, any
upgrades or additional facilities required by the City, and a description of when
services will commence. The report found that none to minimum municipal service
impacts would occur due to the annexation of the area.
~
AGENDA ITEM ~
PAGE~OFJ3
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006 "will'
PAGE 8 OF 13
PROJECT TITLE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-
12, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03,
PRE-ZONING NO. 2006-04 AND ANNEXATION NO.
77
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2005-12 has been prepared pursuant
to Article 6 (Negative Declaration Process) and Section 15070 (Decision to Prepare a
Negative or Mitigated Negative Declaration) of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA). Based on staffs evaluation, the proposed project will not result in any
significant effect on the environment. Further, pursuant to Section 15073 (Public
Review of a Proposed Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration) of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the intended Mitigated Negative
Declaration was submitted to the State Clearinghouse on May 1, 2006 for the required
30 day review period, which ended on June 1, 2006. No comments have been
received.
~
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the following Resolutions:
Resolution No. 2006-_, recommending City Council adoption of Mitigated
Negative Declaration No. 2005-12; Resolution No. 2006-_ recommending to the
City Council approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2006-03, Resolution No.
2006-_ recommending to the City Council approval of Pre-Zoning No. 2006-04, and
Resolution No. 2006-_ recommending to the City Council approval to commence
with proceedings for the properties described in Annexation No. 77. Approval is based
on the following Findings, Exhibits, and attached Conditions of Approval.
FINDINGS - MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-12
1. Revision in the project plans or proposal made by or agreed to by the applicant
before a proposed mitigated negative declaration and initial study are released
for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where
clearly no significant effects would occur.
~
AGENDA ITEM_!i
PAGE~OFTI
,- REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
PAGE 9 OF 13
PROJECT TITLE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-
12, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03,
PRE-ZONING NO. 2006-04 AND ANNEXATION NO.
77
The applicant has made revisions to the project or has agreed to specific
conditions which would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects of the project to
a point where no significant effects would occur.
2. There is no substantial evidence, in the light of the whole record before the
agency, that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the
environment.
Pursuant to the evidence received in the light of the whole record presented by
staff to the Planning Commission, the project will not have a significant effect
on the environment considering the Mitigation Monitoring Report Program.
,,-
FINDINGS -GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03
,,--
1. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not be; a) detrimental to the health,
safety, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the
neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within the City, or b) injurious to
the property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City.
The proposed General Plan Amendment has been analyzed relative to its
potentiality to be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort and welfare of the
persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed
amendment. Staff believes that the health, safety and welfare of the persons
residing or working within the neighborhood of the property may be improved
due to the future development that could include improvements to infrastructure
such as water and sewer lines, lighting and paving of existing dirt right of ways.
2. The proposed General Plan Amendment will permit reasonable development of
the area consistent with its constraints and will make the area more compatible
with adjacent properties.
Staff, concluded that the current rapid development of a major single family
residential development adjacent to the Annexation area (Ramsgate) is a strong
indication that the area is rapidly changingfrom rural type uses to an area with
AGENDA ITEM l\
PAGE~ OF 32.
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1, 2006 ~
PAGE 10 OF 13
PROJECT TITLE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-
12, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03,
PRE-ZONING NO. 2006-04 AND ANNEXATION NO.
77
more suburban type uses. The General Plan Amendment proposes land use
changes from the County's designation of Very Low Density Residential to Low
Medium Density will allow the continuation of the single family home
development.
3. The proposed General Plan Amendment would establish a land use density and
usage more in character with the subject property's location, access, and
constraints.
The Annexation will establish land uses more consistent with the land uses
adjacent and nearby the area. The neighboring major single family residential
development is bringing infrastructure improvement to the western boundary of
the Annexation. Improvements include all required utilities as well as major
road improvements. Major commercial development (Costco/Lowe's, Home
Depot and Target Centers) are currently open and operating or are near
completion and are located less that five miles from the Annexation area.
4. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not have a significant effect on the
environment.
~
The proposed General Plan Amendment was included within the description of
the project's Initial Study. Based on the Initial Study, staff intends to adopt a
Mitigated Negative Declaration, which concluded with mitigations that the
project, upon annexation, will not have a significant effect on the environment.
FINDINGS - PRE-ZONING NO. 2006-04
1. The proposed zone change will not be; a) detrimental to the health, safety,
comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the
neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within the City, or b) injurious to
the property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City.
The proposed Pre-Zoning has been analyzed relative to its potential to be
detrimental to the health, safety, comfort and welfare of the persons residing or
working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment. Staff believes
AGENDA ITEM ~
PAGE -1Q OF TI
'"-'
/"""'
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
PAGE 11 OF 13
PROJECT TITLE: MITIGA TED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-
12, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03,
PRE-ZONING NO. 2006-04 AND ANNEXATION NO.
77
,.......
that the health and safety of the persons residing or working within the
neighborhood of the property may be improved due to the future development
that could include improvements to infrastructure such as water and sewer
lines, lighting and paving of existing dirt right of ways.
2. The proposed action will be consistent with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies
of the General Plan and the development standards established with the Lake
Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC).
Based on its analysis, staff has concluded that the requested Pre-Zoning,
allowing the annexation of the subject property is consistent with GOAL 1.0 of
the General Plan in that this Pre-Zoning will assist in achieving the City's goal
to provide "decent housing opportunities and a satisfying living environment for
residents of Lake Elsinore ".
FINDINGS - ANNEXATION NO. 77
1. The proposed annexation area is contiguous to the City of Lake Elsinore and
will not create pockets or islands.
The proposed annexation area is contiguous on two sides to the Ramsgate
Specific Plan area on the easterly boundary of the project and will be a
reasonable extension of the city boundary areas in that the annexation of the
proposed parcels will not create any pockets or islands an, in fact, is removing
an existing pocket.
2. The proposed annexation will not result in any adverse significant impacts on
the environment.
.,,--
As defined by Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) Guidelines, an Initial Study was prepared in order to provide the City
with information necessary in determining whether an Environmental Impact
Report (EIR), Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration would
be the appropriate necessary environmental documentation and clearance for
the subject project contained herein. According to section 15070(b) of the
AGENDA ITEM lL
PAGE~OF~
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
PAGE 12 OF 13
PROJECT TITLE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-
12, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03,
PRE-ZONING NO. 2006-04 AND ANNEXATION NO.
77
'-'
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) a Mitigated Negative
Declaration was appropriate since it deemed that although the proposal for the
Annexation, General Plan Amendment, Pre-Zoning could result in significant
effects, mitigation measures were available reducing these significant effects to
insignificant levels.
3. The proposed annexation will eliminate an existing undesired pocket of the
county area.
The annexation is being initiated by City of Lake Elsinore pursuant to the
directive of the Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO)
regulations originally commission in 1992 and again requested by LAFCO in
2004. The one hundred fifty-four (J 54) acre project is an existing pocket of
County of Riverside jurisdiction. Approval of the Annexation will eliminate this
pocket and create a continuous City of Lake Elsinore boundary.
'-'
PREPARED BY:
LINDA MILLER, AICP, PROJECT PLANNER
APPROVED BY:
~
Rolfe M. Preisendanz,
Director of Community Development
'-'"
AGENDA ITEM J..L
PAGE \~OFn:
~
r'
/'-
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
PAGE 13 OF 13
PROJECT TITLE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-
12, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03,
PRE-ZONING NO. 2006-04 AND ANNEXATION NO.
77
ATTACHMENTS:
1. VICINITY MAP
2. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS
3. PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
4. PROPERTY OWNERS LETTER DATED JUNE 19,2006
5. NOTICE OF DETERMINATION - NEGATIVE DECLARATION
6. REDUCED EXHIBITS:
a. REGIONAL AND VICINITY MAP
b. EXISITNG GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
c. PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
d. EXISTING ZONING
e. PROPOSED ZONING (PRE-ZONING)
f. SITE PHOTO MAP
7. MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-12/MITIGATION
MONITORING PLAN
8. SCOPE OF SERVICES REPORT
9. FISCAL ANALYSIS REPORT
10.FULL SIZED COLOR EXHIBITS (same as Exhibits listed above, presented at
Hearing)
AGENDA ITEM .~
PAGE~F33
~
"0
(J) c:
It= 0
;; +:;
o (IJ
Z ~
lJ) ;
(j) 0
o Z
(IJ ...;
a. u..
o
c: 0
o ('I)
~ ch
x (j)
~ ~ ~
(IJ c: (IJ
"0 <( a.
c: "0 ai
::l (J) c:
o lJ) 0
m 0 ;
~ g- :0
U a: ~
~:II
N
d
<1z;;
8
d
en U)~
<:; <:;Cl
~ -8~'"
C i c"
"8 .;oe
..ii1~;; ii1<
1:t3;!g~3~
l Hi ih.....
11
r--
r--
o
Z
Z
o
F= '--"
~
W
Z
Z
c(
o
'"
-'"
dlll 15
.~~~ ~
w< !~.~
"~g'?,
ii_.w'" ..
=~iD~ii
~~~~-i.
._ C'? QJ .0
u....-Je?.
*-
ACENM \lEM ..0,_ ~ -
PAGE \5 OF_ 3>
-
/"""'
RESOLUTION NO. 2006- 7D
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE ADOPTION OF MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-12
WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elsinore has initiated an application for
General Plan Amendment No. 2006-03, Pre-Zoning No. 2006-04, and Annexation
No. 77 for a one hundred fifty-four (154) acre site located adjacent to State Route
74; and
/"""'
WHEREAS, Annexation 77 is defined as a "project" by Section 21065 of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Cal. Public Resources Code
Section 21000 et seq., which is defined as an activity which may cause either a
direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect
physical change in the environment and which includes the issuance to a person of
a lease, permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement for use by one or more
public agencies; and
WHEREAS, Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2005-12 has been
prepared to evaluate environmental impacts resulting with the project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has
been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City
Council for approving Mitigated Negative Declaration's; and
WHEREAS, public notice of said applications has been given, and the
Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community
Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with
respect to this item on August 1, 2006.
NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE
AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
----
ACiENDA ITEM NO. lr
PAOE___ ,~ ... Of ~ '1 .---
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
Page 2 of3
.......,
SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the proposed
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2005-12, prior to making a decision to
recommend approval to the City Council. The Planning Commission finds and
determines that Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2005-12 is adequate and
prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA).
SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning law and
the City of Lake Elsinore the following findings for the approval of Mitigated
Negative Declaration No. 2005-12 has been made as follows:
1. Revision in the project plans or proposal made by or agreed to by the
applicant before a proposed mitigated negative declaration and initial study
are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects
to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur.
The applicant has made revisions to the project or has agreed to specific
conditions which would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects of the project
to a point where no significant effects would occur.
"'-J
2. There is no substantial evidence, in the light of the whole record before the
agency, that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the
environment.
Pursuant to the evidence received in the light of the whole record presented
by staff to the Planning Commission, the project will not have a significant
effect on the environment considering the Mitigation Monitoring Report
Program.
SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its
passage and adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this first day of August, 2006,
by the following vote:
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
"'-J
ACENDA ITEM NO._ l\.
PAGE.... \\ OF 33>
~
/""
~
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
Page 3 of3
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:
COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST:
Rolfe M. Preisendanz,
Director of Community Development
Michael O'Neal, Chairman
Lake Elsinore Planning Commission
4-
AGENOA llEM NO,_ 3 '>
PAGC_ \~ Of_ -
RESOLUTION NO. 2006- 1 \
......"
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03 AMENDING THE
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS ON
ONE HUNDRED FIFTY-FOUR (154) ACRES
ADJACENT TO STATE ROUTE 74, EAST OF
TRELLIS LANE
WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elsinore has initiated proceedings to amend
the General Plan Land Use Map as part of an annexation process, thereby
requesting a General Plan Amendment on one hundred fifty-four (154) acres; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has
been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City
Council for changes to the General Plan Land Use Map; and
~
WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given, and the
Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community
Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with
respect to this item on August 1,2006.
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 proposed
General Plan Amendment No. 2006-03, prior to making a decision to recommend
that the City Council approve the proposed changes to the General Plan Land Use
Map. The Planning Commission finds and determines that Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. 2006-02 is adequate and prepared in accordance with the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning law and
the City of Lake Elsinore the following findings for the approval of General Plan
Amendment No. 2006-03 have been made as follows:
......"
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4-
PACE \'\ OF 3~
,--
/"
~
PLANNING COMMISION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-_
Page 2 of3
1. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not be; a) detrimental to the
health, safety, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working
within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within the City, or
b) injurious to the property or improvements in the neighborhood or within
the City.
The proposed General Plan Amendment has been analyzed relative to its
potential to be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort and welfare of the
persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed
amendment. Staff believes that the health, safety and welfare of the persons
residing or working within the neighborhood of the property may be
improved due to the future development that could include improvements to
infrastructure such as water and sewer lines, lighting and paving of existing
dirt right of ways.
2. The proposed General Plan Amendment will permit reasonable development
of the area consistent with its constraints and will make the area more
compatible with adjacent properties.
Staff, concluded that the current rapid development of a major single family
residential development adjacent to the Annexation area (Ramsgate) is a
strong indication that the area is rapidly changing from rural type uses to
an area with more suburban type uses. The General Plan Amendment
proposes land use changes from the County's designation of Very Low
Density Residential to Low Medium Density will allow the continuation of
the single family home development.
3. The proposed General Plan Amendment would establish a land use density
and usage more in character with the subject property's location, access, and
constraints.
The Annexation will establish land uses more consistent with the land uses
adjacent and nearby the area. The neighboring major single family
residential development is bringing infrastructure improvement to the
western boundary of the Annexation. Improvements include all required
utilities as well as major road improvements. Major commercial
development (Costco/Lowe's, Home Depot and Target Centers) are
AGENDA ITEM NO. ~
PAGE ~O Of '>
PLANNING COMMISION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-_
Page 3 of3
....."
currently open and operating or are near completion and are located less
that five miles from the Annexation area.
4. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not have a significant effect on
the environment.
The proposed General Plan Amendment was included within the description
of the project's Initial Study. Based on the Initial Study, staff intends to
adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration, which concluded with mitigations
that the project, upon annexation, will not have a significant effect on the
environment.
SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its
passage and adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED thiS first day of August, 2006,
by the following vote:
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
'-"
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:
COMMISSIONERS:
Michael O'Neal, Chairman
Lake Elsinore Planning Commission
ATTEST:
Rolfe M. Preisendanz,
Director of Community Development
....."
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4
PAOE ~\ OF 33
------
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-~
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE APPROVAL OF PRE-ZONING NO.
2006-04 SUBJECT TO COMPLETION OF THE
ANNEXATION NO. 77 LOCATED ADJACENT TO
STATE ROUTE 74, EAST OF TRELLIS LANE.
WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elsinore has initiated to change the Zoning of
the subject approximately one hundred fifty-four (154) acre site from County of
Riverside's zoning designations to City of Lake Elsinore's Pre-Zoning
designations; and
WHEREAS, the Pre-Zoning application is conforming and consistent to the
proposed application amended the City of Lake Elsinore's General Plan Land Use
Map; and
,,--.
WHEREAS, City of Lake Elsinore has submitted an additional application
for Annexation No. 77; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has
been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City
Council for changes to the approved Zoning Map; and
WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given, and the
Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community
Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with
respect to this item on August 1, 2006.
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 proposed Pre-
Zoning No. 2006-04, prior to making a decision to recommend that the City
Council approve the proposed amendment to the Zoning Map. The Planning
Commission finds and determines that Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2005-
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4-
PAGE ~1. OF 33
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-_
Page 2 of3
"'"
12 is adequate and prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning law and
the City of Lake Elsinore the following findings for the approval of Zone Change
No. 2006-04 has been made as follows:
1. The proposed zone change will not be; a) detrimental to the health, safety,
comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the
neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within the City, or b) injurious
to the property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City.
The proposed Pre-Zoning has been analyzed relative to its potential to be
detrimental to the health, safety, comfort and welfare of the persons residing
or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment. Staff
believes that the health and safety of the persons residing or working within
the neighborhood of the property may be improved due to the future
development that could include improvements to infrastructure such as "'"
water and sewer lines, lighting and paving of existing dirt right of ways.
2. The proposed action will be consistent with the Goals, Objectives, and
Policies of the General Plan and the development standards established with
the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC).
Based on its analysis, staff has concluded that the requested Pre-Zoning,
allowing the annexation of the subject property is consistent with GOAL 1.0
of the General Plan in that this Pre-Zoning will assist in achieving the City's
goal to provide "decent housing opportunities and a satisfying living
environment for residents of Lake Elsinore".
SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its
passage and adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this first day of August, 2006,
by the following vote:
"'"
AGENDA ITEM NO. l;
PACE ~'1 OF ')>
,.... PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-_
Page 3 of3
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:
COMMISSIONERS:
Michael O'Neal, Chairman
Lake Elsinore Planning Commission
ATTEST:
~
Ro lfe M. Preisendanz,
Director of Community Development
"..-...
AGENDA ITEM NO. It
PACe ~ ~ OF Y3
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-1 >
'-'
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL THE COMMENCEMENT
OF PROCEEDINGS TO ANNEX THE TERRITORY
DESIGNATED AS ANNEXATION NO. 77 INTO
THE CORPORATE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY
OF LAKE ELSINORE LOCATED ADJACENT TO
STATE ROUTE 74, EAST OF TRELLIS LANE
WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elsinore has initiated the annexation of the
subject approximately one hundred fifty-four (154) acre site from the County of
Riverside's jurisdiction and within the City of Lake Elsinore's Sphere of Influence
area, into the corporate boundaries of the City of Lake Elsinore; and
WHEREAS, this proposal is made pursuant to the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg
Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (Government Code Section 56000-
56001); and
......,
WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elsinore has initiated Pre-Zoning No. 2006-
04; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has
been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City
Council for annexations; and
WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given and the
Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community
Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing with
respect to this item on August 1, 2006.
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 request for the
annexation (Annexation No. 77), prior to making a decision to recommend that the
City Council commence proceedings to annex the subject territory. The Planning
.....,
AaENDA ITEM NO. ~
PAGE ~ OF 5>
",--
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-_
Page 2 of3
12 is adequate and prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning law and
the City of Lake Elsinore the following findings for the approval of Zone Change
No. 2005-09 has been made as follows:
1. The proposed zone change will not be; a) detrimental to the health, safety,
comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the
neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within the City, or b) injurious
to the property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City.
The proposed Pre-Zoning has been analyzed relative to its potential to be
detrimental to the health, safety, comfort and welfare of the persons residing
or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment. Staff
believes that the health and safety of the persons residing or. working within
~ the neighborhood of the property may be improved due to the future
development that could include improvements to infrastructure such as
water and sewer lines, lighting and paving of existing dirt right of ways.
2. The proposed action will be consistent with the Goals, Objectives, and
Policies of the General Plan and the development standards established with
the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC).
Based on its analysis, staff has concluded that the requested Pre-Zoning,
allowing the annexation of the subject property is consistent with GOAL 1.0
of the General Plan in that this Pre-Zoning will assist in achieving the City's
goal to provide "decent housing opportunities and a satisfying living
environment for residents of Lake Elsinore ".
SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its
passage and adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this first day of August, 2006,
by the following vote:
",-....
AGENDA ITEM NO. It
PAGE ~ b OF '3'3>
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
Page 3 of3
""'"
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:
COMMISSIONERS:
Michael O'Neal, Chairman
Lake Elsinore Planning Commission
ATTEST:
""'"
Rolfe M. Preisendanz,
Director of Community Development
""'"
AGE/lDA ITEM NO. i ')
PACE 11 Of
GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. The City of Lake Elsinore shall defend (with counsel), indemnify, and hold
harmless City Official, Officers, Employees, Consultants and Agents from any
claim, action, or proceeding against the City, its Official, Officers, Employees, or
Agents to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City, its advisory
agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning the project, which action is
bought within the time period provided for in California Government Code
Sections 65009 and/or 66499.37, and Public Resources Code Section 21167.
ANNEXATION NO. 77
2. The annexation of said property shall comply with the requirements contained in
the Cortese-Knox-Herzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000
(Government Code Section 56000-56001) and the standards and policies
established by the Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO).
I""""
3. All entitlements contained herein are subject to the completion and approval of the
annexation of the subject property.
r-
AGENDA rtEM NO. \
PACE_ ~, Of - ')
(lit!) of 1!afu: ELilno'rE
",n /7. , /2 _1111 "
\:Jf2E, L./.~ j. '::::lot ClIltO'U. ~
~
~~.....'
"-'
June 19,2006
. ~O />(
~~\~: tyxor
Property Owner( s)
Within Annexation No. 77
RE: RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS DISCUSSED AT lHE PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING
Dear Property Owner(s):
Your attendance and participation at last month's (May 17, 2006) Annexation Public Scoping
Meeting was appreciated. Staff is pleased to provide you with this follow up letter in response to
the questions that were raised at that meeting.
CENTEX RELATED ISSUES
Although many of the questions associated to the project known as "Centex Homes" were not ...",
directly related to the Annexation in question, it was made clear that there are several concerns
regarding the current construction situation. Therefore, the City asked Centex to respond to
questions related to dust, mud, blasting, cliffs, detour road/signs, Wasson Canyon Road closure,
riding horses, and rude behavior. Jane Blasingham, of Centex Homes went to the Centex site the
next day (May 18, 2006) and reported the following:
Dust:
Centex has nine (9) water trucks on the site. The trucks work throughout the day to
keeping down the dust. Ms. Blasingham reported that she drove the site and her vehicle
did not generate any dust. She also watched approximately five (5) residents drive
through the site, and their vehicles did not generate dust.
Mud:
Ms. Blasingham found that the mud was the result of the water trucks trying to control
the dust. She stated that there was an excessive amount of mud at the east of Riverside
Street due to water trucks stopping at that location. She discussed this with the truck
drivers and the over watering situation has been resolved.
Blasting:
Ms. Blasingham stated that the blasting was to stop as of May 18, 2006, except for one
man-hole. A neighboring track to the Centex tract is blasting and that may be were the
noise is coming from. .,
130 aoulh o11ain ahu.l, .Lake:. E[1J.ino'le:., Cd! 92530 Cfe:.te:.phone:.: (909) 674-3124 9ax: (909) 674-2392
www.lake:.-e:.[1J.inotE..otg (I
ACENDA ITEM NO. ~ r>
PAGE ~~ OF
Property Owners within Annexation No. 77
June 19,2006
" Page 2 of 4
Cliffs:
Ms. Blasingham was unsure of the cliffs in question. This issue may need to be discussed
at a subsequent meeting. She directed the on-site manager to place orange fencing or
caution tape along the tops of slopes.
Detour Road/Signs:
She felt that the Detour Road was maneuverable. There seemed to be problems keep
detour signs on the site. She was told that the Detour Road signs were removed or
knocked down at night. She asked the field manager about the report of someone driving
in a ditch, but no incident was known or reported.
Wasson Canyon Road Closure:
This road has been closed with permission from the City. Resident's have been directed
to use Riverside Street.
r"
Horse Riding: .
Since the Centex site is in a state of on-going 'construction, riding horses through the area
is considered to be unsafe. A property owner was stopped from riding his horse through
the project by the on-site field manager. No horse trails were planned for the new Centex
development, primarily, because the development is all standard sized, R-I, Single
Family Residential development lots.
Rude Behavior:
Ms. Blasingham spoke to the construction team and no incidents were reported or known
by anyone.
Since this initial research, Ms Blasingham has decided that it would be a benefit to both the
property owners and Centex to hold an additional meeting at the Centex project site to discuss
these issues and any other issues regarding the Centex development. An invitation to this more
informal meeting will be forthcoming.
UTILITIESIINFRASTRUCTURE CONCERNS
A property owner will not be required to connect to any utility company such as water, sewer, or
gas unless the property owner's system creates a health hazard for the property owner or
neighboring owner.
Water
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD) was contacted regarding the question of
whether current property owners with private wells would be required to join the Water District
if the property was annexed. The answer is NO. The only reason that a well owner would be
required to join a water district is if it was found that the well was providing unsafe water and
thus was determined to be a health issue. Currently, waterlines have been extended down
~ Riverside Street, Missouri Trail and Laister Road. If a property owner decides to join the water
district, the water connection fee for a %" meter is $5,971.00.
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE )0 OF
1>
Property Owners within Annexation No. 77
June 19,2006
Page 30f 4
'-'
Sewer
Currently there are sewer lines in the Centex project to the west of Trellis Lane. Sewer lines will
be extended as the neighboring Centex project is built. A property owner could contact EVMWD
for a cost to hook up to a sewer system.
Gas
According the Southern California Gas Company the closest gas line is currently in State Route
74. To determine the cost of bring gas to a site the Gas Company suggesting going to their web
site at socalgas.com. Cost to bring a gas line to a residence is calculated on a case by case basis.
Several property owners could join together to bring a line to their properties for a possible
savings. Eventually, a gas line will be brought down Riverside Street.
KEEPING EXISTING ANIMALS
The City will not require a property owner to remove any existing animals, but if the number of
animals exceeds the City's zoning code and as the animals are removed for various reasons, the
animals would not be allowed to be replaced more than what is allowed per the zoning
requirement. Currently four (4) equine, bovine, swine, sheep or goats are allowed per acre in the
R-l zone, which is the zone proposed for the site. For each additional acre, two (2) additional
animals are allowed (for example, six (6) animals on two (2) acres).
EXISTING NON-CONFORMING USES
'"
All existing non-conforming uses such as commercial businesses located in the residential land
use designated areas will be allowed to remain as long as the business continues operating. If a
business ceases to operate for a period of six (6) months or more, the land use will revert to the
approved land use.
ANNEXATION PROCESS
The Annexation process goes through the City process prior to being sent to Riverside Local
Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) process. An Environmental Document is prepared
and circulated. After the Circulation period has closed the project will be scheduled for a
Planning Commission Public Hearing and a City Council Public Hearing. It is recommended that
a Public Scoping Meeting be public meeting is planned before the project will be scheduled for
Planning Commission. It is anticipated the Planning Commission meeting will take place in July
or August.
If the Annexation project is approved by the City Council, the project will proceed to the
(LAFCO) for consideration. LAFCO staff will review the document to determine whether the
application is complete. LAFCO staff will set the proposed annexation for public hearing before
the Local Agency Formation Commission. If approved, LAFCO will notify registered voters and
property owners and send them a protest form to return, if they are opposed to the annexation
....,
AGENDA ITEM NO. ~
PACE ~\ OF 1}
Property Owners within Annexation No. 77
June 19, 2006
~. Page 4 of4
HOW TO PROTEST AN ANNEXATION
If more than 25% of the registered voters or property owners owning more that 25% of the
assessed value of the property within the area are opposed to the Annexation, an election will be
scheduled by LAFCO. If 50% or more of the registered voters of the area or property owners
whose holdings constitute 50% or more of the assessed value of the land and improvements vote
against the annexation, then the annexation process is terminated.
CLOSING
Since the reason for the City of Lake Elsinore to process this Annexation is a directive from
LAFCO, it would be the City's preference that the Annexation be approved. Staff has found that
there will be little or no change in costs to the property owner if their property was annexed into
the City. Specifically, the only increase would be a Street Lighting and Maintenance District fee
of $24.90 per year per home or $29.88 per acre for vacant land. Currently the processing time for
an Annexation is approximately eight (8) months.
The next step in the process will be another neighborhood meeting to be held on Centex
property. The Annexation request will be presented to the Planning Commission and all property
owners within the area will be notified. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call
me at (951) 674 3124, extension 209 or Email at lmiller@lake-elsinore.org.
,........
Sincerely,
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
www.lake-elsinore.org
Linda M. Miller, AICP
Project Planner
CC: Rolfe Preisendanz, Community Development Director
Tom Weiner, Planning Manager
---
AGENDA'TEM NO.
pACE ~ 1-. OF
~
~3 _
Notice of Determination
Negative Declaration
(In compliance with Section 2 I 108 or 2 I 152
of the Public Resources Code)
......"
City of Lake Elsinore
Planning Division
130 S. Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
(909) 674-3124
(909) 471-1419 fax
Filed With:
o
Office of Planning and Research
1400 Tenth Street, Room 121
Sacramento, CA 95814
~
County Clerk of Riverside County
2724 Gateway Drive
Riverside, CA 92507
Project Title: Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2005-12, General Plan Amendment No. 2006-03, Pre-Zoning No. 2006-04, and
Annexation No. 77.
State Clearinghouse Number: SCH No: 2006051003
Lead Age,ncy Contact Person: Linda Miller, Project Planner Telephone Number: (909) 674-3124 x 209
Project Location (include County): The one hundred fifty-four (154)) acre, irregularly shaped, Annexation area is located
adjacent to State Route 74 (SR-74). One hundred fifty (150) parcels are located south ofSR 74 and four (4) parcels are located north
of SR-74. Trellis Lane creates the western boundary. The southerly property line zigzags along the boundary of the neighboring
Centex development currently under construction and within the City of Lake Elsinore's City Limits. The eastern boundary is just past
the residential lots fronting Missouri Drive. The central access road is Riverside Street. The existing County of Riverside General Plan
Designation is Very Low Density (VLD) and Commercial Retail (CR), and the Zoning Designations are R-A-20,000 (Residential
Agriculture) and C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial).
~
Project Description: The proposed annexation consists of one hundred fifty-four (154) acres that has been previously subdivided
into forty-five (45) parcels. Of the forty-five (45) parcels, twenty-six (26) are occupied with rural type residential uses and a few
commercial uses, while the remaining nineteen (19) parcels are vacant. The parcels are owned by many individual land owners. The
land area ranges from relative flat areas to hills consisting of natural vegetation and substantial rock outcroppings.
The area is under the jurisdiction of the County of Riverside but within the City of Lake Elsinore's Sphere of Influence area of the
City of Lake Elsinore. The Annexation process requires that the City of Lake Elsinore approve a General Plan Amendment and Pre-
Zoning designations thereby establishing a regulatory procedure that must be followed for future development to occur. Approval of
the Annexation does not permit development of the property within the one hundred fifty-four (one hundred fifty-four (154)) acre
project site. This process will concurrently remove the area from the City's Sphere of Influence and place the area with the City of
Lake Elsinore's city boundary. Environmental clearance for the proposed applications is provided by Mitigated Negative Declaration
No. 2005-12, in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
This is to advise that the Lake Elsinore Ci13' Council (Lead Agency) has approved the above projects and has made
the following determinations regarding the above described projects:
Reasons why project is exempt: Section 15162 (Subsequent EIR's and Negative Declarations)
The project does not propose any substantial changes to the City of Lake Elsinore's Municipal Code. Additionally,
no new significant environmental effects are anticipated. Further, the project complies with the exiting Mitigation
Measures already in place. Considering this, the Planning Commission and City Council determined that no further
environmental documentation is necessary.
Signed:
Title: Community Development Director
Rolfe M. Preisendanz
......"
AGENDA ITIM NO.
PACE )'> OF
~
~')
tf~ If-o .
~
RESOLUTION NO. 2006- (p~
~
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE APPROVAL OF RAMS GATE
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 89-1 FOURTH REVISION,
LOCATED APPROXIMATELY ONE MILE EAST
OF INTERESTATE 15, SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 74,
AND WEST OF GREENWALD AVENUE.
WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Lake
Elsinore by The Shopoff Group, 8951 Research Drive, Irvine, CA 92618, to
amend the Ramsgate Specific Plan No. 89-1; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore
has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to
the City Council pertaining to changes to approved specific plans; and
~
WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given, and the
Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community
Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing
held with respect to this item on August 1,2006.
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 proposed
Ramsgate Specific Plan No. 89-1 Fourth Revision prior to making a decision
to recommend that the City Council approve the proposed amendment.
Pursuant to Section 21080 (c )(2) of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA), the Planning Commission finds and determines that
Addendum No.3 to the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report
for Ramsgate (SCH No. 88090525) is adequate and prepared in accordance
with the requirements of CEQA which analyzes environmental effects of the
proposed project.
r"
ACiENDA ITEM NO.~
PAGE 31 _OF--U..L-
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
RAMSGATE SP 89-1 FOURTH REVISION
AUGUST 1, 2006
PAGE 20F4
~
SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning law
and Chapter 17.99 (Specific Plan District) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal
Code the following findings for the approval of Ramsgate Specific Plan No.
89-1 Fourth Revision have been made as follows:
1. The location and design of the proposed development is consistent with
the goals and policies of the City's General Plan and with any other
applicable plan or policies adopted by the City, or in the process of being
prepared and adopted.
a. The General Plan supports the development of the Ramsgate Specific
Plan. The proposed Revision has been reviewed and conditioned to
enhance and update the original Specific Plan.
b. The proposal has been designed to support the objectives of the Multi-
Species Habitat Conservation Plan adopted by the City, by preserving
habitat areas identified in the Conservation Plan.
"""
c. A marketing analysis by DDS Marketing dated June 2006 determined
that there is insufficient households in the catchment area to support a
retail grocer.
2. The proposed location allows the development to be well-integrated with
or adequately buffered from its surroundings, whichever may be the case.
a. The proposed Revision integrates development of medium high density
residential, as a buffer between apartment development to the west
and the single family detached residential neighborhoods to the east.
b. The proposed Revision increases the variety of housing types offered
in the Ramsgate Specific Plan.
"-'"
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
PAGE 40 OF III
,- RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
RAMSGATE SP 89-1 FOURTH REVISION
AUGUST 1,2006
PAGE 30F4
3. All vehicular traffic generated by the development, either in phased
increments or at full build-out, is to be accommodated safely and without
causing undue congestion upon adjoining streets.
a. The environmental review of the Fourth Revision indicates that traffic
generated by the proposed project will be significantly less than that
generated by the previously approved specific plan. Project trip
generation is reduced from 16,000 daily trips to 2,775.
~
b. The City of Lake Elsinore General Plan states that the objective of the
City is to "strive to maintain a minimum Level of Service 'C' at all
intersections during non-peak hours and Level of Service 'D' at all
intersections during peak hours to ensure that traffic delays are kept
to a minimum." Except for the intersection of River Road at State
Route 74 in the County, all intersections within the study area will
meet the City's level of service objective.
4. The Final Specific Plan shall identify a methodology to allow land uses
to be adequately serviced by existing or proposed public facilities and
servIces.
a. The proposed Revision has been reviewed and conditioned to provide
adequate public services to the site.
b. The proposed Revision provides recreational amenities, pedestrian
pathways, and open space for residents in the medium high density
residential development.
5. The overall design of the Specific Plan shall produce an attractive,
efficient and stable development.
~
a. The proposed Revision will allow the construction of a mix of
residential units within Ramsgate. Design Guidelines have been
included to establish a consistent design expression among site
ACENDA ITEM NO.3. .
PAGE3.L~
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
RAMSGATE SP 89-1 FOURTH REVISION
AUGUST 1,2006
PAGE 40F4
"-"
planning, architectural and landscaping components while allowing
reasonable flexibility in design.
6. In accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), impacts have been reduced to a level of non-
significance, or in the case where impacts remain, a Statement of
Overriding Considerations is recommended for adoption to justify the
merits of project implementation.
SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the
date of its passage and adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this first day of August,
2006, by the following vote:
"-"
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
Michael O'Neal, Chairman
Lake Elsinore Planning Commission
ATTEST:
Rolfe M. Preisendanz, Director of Community Development
......"
AGENDA'~ NO. 3
PAGE ~1?- OF 1/ ~.
~
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
RAMSGATE SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 89-1 FOURTH REVISION
LOCATED APPROXIMATELY ONE MILE EAST OF INTERESTATE 15.
SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 74 AND WEST OF GREENWALD A VENUE
PLANNING DIVISION
1. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its
officials, officers, employees, and/or agents from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City, its officials, officers, employees, or agents
concerning the project attached hereto.
2. The City intends to file a Notice of Determination with the Riverside County
Clerk's office within five (5) business days from the approval of this specific
plan amendment by the City Council. The applicant shall forward to the
Planning Department secretary, a check made payable to the Riverside County
Clerk, in the amount of $914.00 to pay for the cost of such filing. This check
shall be received by the secretary no more than 48 hours from the approval by
the Council.
",....-
3. The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP)
adopted for this project, as printed with the certified Addendum to the Final
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse
#88090525).
4. The applicant shall fund the implementation of the MMP through every stage
of development. The City shall appoint an environmental monitor who shall
periodically inspect the project site, documents submitted by the applicant,
permits issued, and any other pertinent material, in order to monitor and report
compliance to the City until the completion of the project.
5. The SPA shall comply with the terms of the Development Agreement and its
Operating Memorandums of Understanding by and between the City of Lake
Elsinore and the applicant.
Page) of2
",....-
ACENDA ITEM NO. 3
PAGE 43 OF /I h
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
RAMSGATE SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 89-1 FOURTH REVISION
LOCATED APPROXIMATELY ONE MILE EAST OF INTERESTATE 15. '-'
SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 74 AND WEST OF GREENWALD AVENUE
6. The applicant shall sign and return an "Acknowledgment of Conditions" to the
Community Development Department within 30 days of approval.
7. The applicant shall submit 15 final revised copies upon approval of Ramsgate
Specific Plan No. 89-1 if necessary to complete the processing of this
application.
(End of Conditions)
...."
Page 2 of2
"'"
AGENDA ITEM NO. f -3
PAGE.3.!i...- Of III
frJ~lDIed 1-0
C~tvUU
"""
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-.(p 7-
//
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP NO. 34231, A ONE LOT SUBDIVISION FOR
CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES, ON
APPROXIMATELY 13.81+ ACRES LOCATED AT
- .
THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF ROSETTA
CANYON DRIVE AND HIGHWAY 74, WITHIN
THE RAMSGATE SPECIFIC PLAN, AND KNOWN
AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 347-120-047.
WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Lake
Elsinore by MBK Homes to subdivide approximately 13.81+ acres of
unimproved property into one lot for condominium purposes; and
,,- WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore
has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to
the City Council pertaining to the subdivision of land; and
WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given, and the
Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community
Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing
held with respect to this item on August 1, 2006.
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 proposed
Tentative Tract Map No. 34231 prior to making a decision to recommend
that the City Council approve the proposal to subdivide approximately 13.81
+ acres into one lot for condominium purposes. Pursuant to Section 21080
(c)(2) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Planning
Commission finds and determines that Addendum No. 3 to the Final
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 88090525) is
AGENDA ITEM NO. .3
PAGEl 1 .. OF Ilk
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
AUGUST 1, 2006
Page 2 of4
.,"""""
adequate and prepared in accordance with the requirements of CEQA which
analyzes environmental effects of the proposed project.
SECTION 2. That in accordance with State of California
Subdivision Map Act, and the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code the
following findings for the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 34231 have
been made as follows:
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP FINDINGS:
1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and
improvements, is consistent with the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan.
The proposed subdivision is compatible with the objectives, policies,
general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan
(Government Code Section 66473.5).
a. The design of the proposed map is for a one lot subdivision consistent
with the Ramsgate Specific Plan Fourth Revision, and therefore with
the General Plan.
'"""""
2. The site of the proposed division of land is physically suitable for the
proposed density of development in accordance with the General Plan.
a. The General Plan encourages clustered development in order to
facilitate the conservation of identified wildlife corridors and habitat.
The project density and design is compatible with the apartments and
community park under construction adjacent to it.
b. The map provides open space areas that protect the natural
topography and views.
3. The effects that this project are likely to have upon the housing needs of
the region, the public service requirements of its residents and the
available fiscal and environmental resources have been considered and
balanced.
.--,
AGENDA ITEM NO...3 /I
PN;E 7;;- OF h
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
AUGUST 1, 2006
r-- Page 3 of 4
a. The project is consistent with the City's General Plan. During the
approval of City's General Plan, housing needs, public services and
fiscal resources were scrutinized to achieve a balance within the City.
b. The map has been conditioned to annex into Community Facilities
District 2003-01 to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the
project on public safety operations and maintenance issues in the
City.
c. The map has been conditioned to annex into Lighting and Landscape
Maintenance District No. 1 to offset the annual negative fiscal
impacts of the project on public right-of-way landscaped areas to be
maintained by the City, and for street lights in the public right-of-way
for which the City will pay for electricity and a maintenance fee to
Southern California Edison.
"......
d. The map has been conditioned to form a Mello-Roos Community
Facilities District to fund the on-going operation and maintenance of
the new parks, parkways, open space and public storm drains
constructed with in the development andfederal NPDES requirements
to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project.
4. The design of the proposed division of land or type of improvements is
not likely to cause serious public health problems.
a. Tentative Tract Map No. 34231 is conditioned to comply with all
development standards of the Ramsgate Specific Plan Fourth
Revision. These standards have been prepared and reviewed to benefit
the public health, safety and welfare.
5. The design of the proposed division of land or the type of improvements
will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for
access through or use of property within the proposed division of land.
a. All known easements or requests for access have been incorporated
into Tentative Tract Map No. 34231.
"......
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
PAGE r3 - OF / I h
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
AUGUST 1, 2006
Page 4 of4
'w11I'
b. The map has been circulated to City departments and outside
agencies, and appropriate conditions of approval have been applied
for their approval during construction.
SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the
date of its passage and adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this first day of August,
2006, by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
'w11I'
Michael O'Neal, Chairman
Lake Elsinore Planning Commission
ATTEST:
Rolfe M. Preisendanz, Director of Community Development
~
AGENDA ITEM NO. '3
PACE1~ ~OF II b
~
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81+ acres for condominium purposes.
on APN 347-120-047
PLANNING DIVISION
1. Tentative Tract Map No. 34231 will expire with the expiration of the
applicable Development Agreement for the Ramsgate Specific Plan and its
accompanying Operating Memorandum( s) of Understanding, unless within
that period of time a final map has been filed with the County Recorder, or an
extension of time is granted by the City of Lake Elsinore City Council.
2. Tentative Tract Map No. 34231 shall comply with the State of California
Subdivision Map Act and shall comply with all applicable requirements of the
Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, Title 16 unless modified by approved
Conditions of Approval.
r"'
3. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its.
officials, officers, employees, and/or agents from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City, its officials, officers, employees, or agents
concerning the project attached hereto.
4. The City intends to file a Notice of Determination with the Riverside County
Clerk's office within five (5) business days from the approval of this map by
the City Council.
5. The applicant shall provide to the Community Development Director within
30 days of approval, a final approved version of the project in digitized
format.
6. The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program (MMRP) adopted for this project, as printed with Addendum No.3 to
the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for Ramsgate Specific
Plan No. 89-1, unless superceded by these Conditions.
7. The applicant shall fund the implementation of the MMRP through every
stage of development. The City shall appoint an environmental monitor who
shall periodically inspect the project site, documents submitted by the
~
Page 1 of15
~(NDA nt1II~ ~ ~
PAGE.:l,./ Of -
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81 + acres for condominium purposes.
on APN 347-120-047
~
applicant, permits issued, and any other pertinent material, in order to monitor
and report compliance to the City until the completion of the project.
8. This map must comply with the Development Standards and Design
Guidelines approved with the Ramsgate Specific Plan No. 89-1 Fourth
Revision (SP). Construction of the property is subject to all the Conditions of
Approval of the SP unless superceded by these conditions. Where the SP is
silent, Title 16 and 17 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code shall apply.
9. Construction on the property covered by this map is subject to the terms and
conditions of the Development Agreement and accompanying Operating
Memorandum(s) of Understanding for the Ramsgate Specific Plan.
10. The applicant shall sign and return an "Acknowledgment of Conditions" to the
Community Development Department within 30 days of the tentative map
approval by the City Council.
PRIOR TO FINAL TRACT MAP:
~
11. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Riverside County Fire
Department.
12. A precise survey with closures for boundaries and all lots shall be provided
per the LEMC.
13. Street names within the subdivision shall be approved by the Community
Development Director or designee prior to final map approval.
14. All of the improvements shall be designed by the developer's Civil Engineer
to the specifications of the City of Lake Elsinore.
15. The applicant shall initiate and complete the formation of a homeowners'
association approved by the City, recorded and in place. All Association
documents shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded, such as
the Articles of Incorporation and Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions
Page 2 of ] 5
~
ACENDA 11!111 NO. :; ~
~~E ,b ~
...-
,--,
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81+ acres for condominium purposes.
on APN 347-120-047
(CC&Rs). The HOA shall be responsible for the maintenance of all open
space areas and maintenance easement areas. The HOA shall maintain or
coordinate with an appropriate agency approved by the Community
Development Director, for such maintenance.
a. In the event that the Homeowners' Association fails to meet its
responsibilities with regards to the maintenance of open space areas,
the Lighting, Landscaping and Maintenance District shall
automatically provide such maintenance and assess the HOA for such
servt ce.
b: CC&Rs shall prohibit on-street storage of boats, motor homes,
trailers, and trucks over one-ton capacity.
c. CC&Rs shall prohibit roof-mounted or front-yard microwave satellite
antennas.
,--,
d. The developer shall provide landscaped areas on both sides of any
access roadways within the tract, and the landscaped areas shall be
maintained by the HOA.
16. All lettered lots shall be owned and maintained by the HOA or other entity
approved by the Community Development Director and so noted on the Final
Map.
17. The Final Map shall identify downslopes adjacent to streets as open space lots
maintained by the HOA or as HOA Maintenance Easements. These HOA
Maintenance Easements shall be planted, irrigated and maintained by the
HOA.
PRIOR TO GRADING AND BUILDING PERMITS:
18. Thirty days prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit to
the Community Development Department a burrowing owl survey for review
and acceptance by the City.
~
Page 3 of 15
AGENDA ITEM NO. ,3
PAGE J l OF__ J lb -
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81 + acres for condominium purposes,
on APN 347-120-047
.....,
19. The City's Noise Ordinance shall be met during all site preparation activity.
Construction shall not commence before 7:00 a.m. and shall cease at 5:00
p.m., Monday through Friday. Construction activity shall not take place on
Saturday, Sunday or any legal holidays.
20. Upon violation by the applicant of the City's Noise Ordinance or Condition of
Approval # 18, applicant shall cease all construction activities and shall be
permitted to recommence such activities only upon depositing with the City a
$5,000 cash deposit available to be drawn upon by the City to fund any future
law enforcement needs that may be caused by potential project construction
violations and the enforcement of the City's Noise Ordinance and Condition
of Approval #18. The applicant shall replenish the deposit upon notice by the
City that the remaining balance is equal to or less than $1,000.
21. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall pay the City's
Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Local Development Mitigation
Fee in effect at that time. The current fee for residential development with a
density of less than 8.0 dwelling units per acre is $1,651 per dwelling unit. For
residential development with a density between 8.1 and 14.0, the current fee is
$1,057 per dwelling unit.
~
22. The Ramsgate SP project area IS not within a Redevelopment Agency
designated area.
23. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Lake Elsinore Unified
School District under the provisions of SB 50, wherein the owner or developer
shall pay school fees or enter into a mitigation agreement prior to the issuance
of a certificate of compliance by the District.
24. The applicant shall provide connection to public sewer for each lot within the
subdivision. No service laterals shall cross adjacent property lines and shall be
delineated on engineering sewer plans and profiles for submittal to the
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD).
Page 4 of ) 5
.....,
AGENDA I1BII l' 3 I .
PAGE 1 OF /.h
~
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81+ acres for condominium purposes,
on APN 347-120-047
25. All storm drains are to be maintained in accordance with the cooperative
agreement with the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District.
a. The homeowners' association shall maintain water quality basins,
landscaping, and open space drainage.
26. The developer shall submit plans to the electric utility company to layout the
street lighting system. The cost of street lighting, installation, and energy
charges shall be the responsibility of the developer and/or the Association
until streets are accepted by the City. Said plans shall be approved by the City
and installed in accordance with City Standards.
27. The applicant shall meet all requirements of the providing electric utility
company.
~
28. The applicant shall meet all requirements of the providing gas utility company.
29. The applicant shall meet all requirements of the providing telephone utility
company.
30. A bond is required guaranteeing the removal of all trailers used during
construction.
31. All signage shall be subject to Planning Division review and approval prior to
installati on.
32. Landscape Plans for the tract shall include vegetative screening of retention
basins and both sides of service roads and drainage easements, if any area
constructed at the site.
33. Any alterations to the topography, ground surface, or any other site
preparation activity will require appropriate grading permits. A Geologic Soils
Report with associated recommendations will be required for grading permit
approval, and all grading must meet the City's Grading Ordinance, subject to
,-...
Page 5 of15
AGENDA ITEM NO.~
PAGE 1 Cf _OF---LJi2-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81 + acres for condominium purposes.
on APN 347-120-047
......",
the approval of the City Engineer and the Planning Division. Analysis of
impacts of fills and cuts greater than sixty feet (60') shall be provided. Interim
and permanent erosion control measures are required. The applicant shall bond
100% for material and labor for one (1) year for erosion control landscaping at
the time the site is rough graded.
PRIOR TO DESIGN REVIEW:
34. All future structural development associated with this map reqUIres the
approval of Design Review No. 2005-24.
35. Elevation drawings for Design Review shall include four-sided architectural
features for both the first and second story. The applicant may submit to the
Community Development Director or his designee, for review and approval,
evidence that a particular elevation is hidden from public view and not visible
due to elevation changes. In those instances, to be determined by the
Community Development Director or his designee on a case-by-case basis,
this condition may be waived.
,.....,
36. Slopes on individual lots that are in excess of three feet in height shall be
installed, landscaped and irrigated by the developer prior to the issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy.
37. Downslopes adjacent to streets shall be maintained by the HOA.
38. The applicant shall install walls and fencing along the perimeter of the
subdivision in accordance with the approved Design Guidelines for the
Ramsgate Specific Plan.
a.. Where views to open space are important, the applicant shall provide
the appropriate view fencing.
Page 6 of 15
......",
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 -~
PAGE 1)0~
~
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81 + acres for condominium purposes,
on APN 347-120-047
ENGINEERING DIVISION
General Requirements:
39. A grading plan signed and stamped by a Calif. Registered Civil Engineer shall
be required if the grading exceeds 50 cubic yards or the existing flow pattern
is substantially modified as determined by the City Engineer. If the grading is
less than 50 cubic yards and a grading plan is not required, a grading permit
shall still be obtained so that a cursory drainage and flow pattern inspection
can be conducted before grading begins.
40. Prior to commencement of grading operations, applicant to provide to the City
with a map of all proposed haul routes to be used for movement of export
mat~rial. Such routes shall be subject to the review and approval of the City
Engineer.
~
41. All grading shall be done under the supervision of a geotechnical engineer and
he shall certify all slopes steeper than 2 to 1 for stability and proper erosion
control. All manufactured slopes greater than 30 ft. in height shall be
contoured.
42. This project shall comply with the recommendations of the traffic study
prepared for the Ramsgate Specific Plan, Tr25479.
43. Provide Tract Phasing Plan for the City Engineer's approval. Bond public
improvements for each Phase as approved by the City Engineer.
44. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained prior to any work on City right-of-
way.
45. Arrangements for relocation of utility company facilities (power poles, vaults,
etc.) out of the roadway or alley shall be the responsibility of the property
owner or his agent. Overhead utilities shall be undergrounded.
,;---
Page 7 0[15
AGENDA tT!M NO. ~ 3
PAGE 13 I Of J/ t,
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81+ acres for condominium purposes.
on APN 347-120-047
'--'
46. Underground water rights shall be dedicated to the City pursuant to the
provisions of Section 16.52.030 (LEMC), and consistent with the City's
agreement with the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District.
47. Applicant shall obtain any necessary Caltrans permits and meet all Caltrans
requirements for any work within Caltrans right-of-way.
48. The applicant shall install permanent bench marks per Riverside County
Standards and at locations to be determined by City Engineer.
49. Provide fire protection facilities as required in writing by Riverside County
Fire. The fuel modification zone shall be maintained by a homeowner's
association.
50. Applicant shall pay all applicable development fees, including but not all
inclusive: TUMF, MSHCP,TIF and area drainage fees.
51. Ten-year storm runoff shall be contained within the curb and the 100 year
storm runoff shall be contained within the street right-of-way. When either
of these criteria are exceeded, drainage facilities shall be provided.
"--'"
52. All drainage facilities in this tract shall be constructed to Riverside County
Flood Control District Standards.
53. All compaction reports, grade certifications, monument certifications (with tie
notes delineated on 8 ~" x 11 II Mylar) shall be submitted to the Engineering
Division before final inspection of public works improvements will be
scheduled and approved.
54. Up-slope maintenance along right-of-ways shall be maintained by a
homeowner's association.
55. All open space and slopes except for public parks and schools and flood
control district facilities, outside the public right-of-way shall be owned and
maintained by homeowner's association.
Page 8 of 15
-......JII
AGENDA ITEM NO.~
PAGE ~r_OF--1Lt2-
,,-.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81 + acres for condominium purposes,
on APN 347-120-047
56.
All waste material, debris, vegetation and other rubbish generated during
cleaning, demolition, clear and grubbing or other phases of the construction
shall be disposed of at appropriate recycling centers. The applicant should
contract with CR&R Inc. for recycling and storage container services, but the
applicant may use the services of another recycling vendor. Another
recycling vendor, other than CR&R Inc., cannot charge the applicant for bin
rental or solid waste disposal. If the applicant is not using CR&R Inc. for
recycling services and the recycling material is either sold or donated to
another vendor, the applicant shall supply proof of debris disposal at a
recycling center, including verification of tonnage by certified weigh master
tickets.
,,-.
57. In accordance with the City's Franchise Agreement for waste disposal &
recycling, the applicant shall be required to contract with CR&R Inc. for
removal and disposal of all waste material, debris, vegetation and other
rubbish generated during cleaning, demolition, clear and grubbing or all
other phases of construction.
58. On-site drainage shall be conveyed to a public facility, accepted by adjacent
property owners by a letter of drainage acceptance, or conveyed to a drainage
easement.
59. All natural drainage traversing the site shall be conveyed through the site, or
shall be collected and conveyed by a method approved by the City Engineer.
60. Roof drains shall not be allowed to outlet directly through coring in the street
curb. Roofs should drain to a landscaped area.
61. The applicant shall comply with all National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System requirements in effect; including the submittal of an Water Quality
Management Plan (WQMP) as required per the Santa Ana Regional Water
Quality Control Board. The requirements of WQMP may affect the overall
layout of the project. Therefore, WQMP submittal should be made during the
initial process of the project.
,,-.
Page 9 of 15
MENDA ITEM NO.~
PAGE 13 _Of.....1.lJJ-.-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81+ acres for condominium purposes.
on APN 347-120-047
.....,
62. Education guidelines and Best Management Practices (BMP) shall be
provided to residents of the development in the use of herbicides, pesticides,
fertilizers as well as other environmental awareness education materials on
good housekeeping practices that contribute to protection of storm water
quality and met the goals of the BMP in Supplement "A" in the Riverside
County NPDES Drainage Area Management Plan. (Required for lot of one
acre or more)
63. Applicant shall provide BMP's that will reduce storm water pollutants from
parking areas and driveway aisles. (Required for lot of one acre or more)
64. City of Lake Elsinore has adopted ordinances for storm water management
and discharge control. In accordance with state and federal law, these local
storm water ordinances prohibit the discharge of waste into storm drain
system or local surface waters. This includes non-storm water discharges
containing oil, grease, detergents, trash, or other waste remains. Brochures of
"Storm water Pollution, What You Should Know" describing preventing
measures are available at City Hall.
.....,
PLEASE NOTE: The discharge of pollutants into street, gutters, storm drain
system, or waterways -without Regional Water Quality Control Board permit or
waver - is strictly prohibited by local ordinances and state and federal law.
Prior to Approval of final Map, unless other timing is indicated, the
subdivider shall complete the following or have plans submitted and
approved, agreements executed and securities posted:
65. Construct the traffic signal at State Route 74 and Ardenwood Way.
66. Improve the north side of Ardenwood Way by constructing a bus bay per RTA
standards and as shown in the map. Note: Additional right-of-way shall be
provided to accommodate the bus bay.
Page 10 ofl5
.....,
~:,p;" ~nr
,......
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81 + acres for condominium purposes.
on APN 347-120-047
67. Interior streets shall be privately maintained and shall have a minimum width
of 28 feet unless otherwise approved by the Fire Department.
68. The driveway entrance at Ardenwood Way shall have a minimum width of 28
feet and shall provide a turnaround area. The gate shall be a minimum of 50
feet from Ardenwood Way.
69. Applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City for the construction of
public works improvements and shall post the appropriate bonds prior to final
map approval.
70. Applicant shall obtain all necessary off-site easements for off-site grading
from the adjacent property owners prior to final map approval.
71. The developer shall provide street lighting and show lighting improvements
(including along State Route 74) as part of street improvement plans as
required by the City Engineer.
~
72. Conduct a traffic signal warrant analysis at the project entrance on Ramsgate
Drive and on Ardenwood Way. If warranted, the signal(s) shall be constructed
and operational prior to occupancy.
73. Make an offer of dedication for all public streets and easements required by
these conditions or shown on the Tentative Map. All land so offered shall be
granted to the City free and clear of all liens and encumbrances and without
cost to the city.
74. The applicant shall submit signing and striping plans for the required street
improvements and a traffic control plan showing all traffic control devices for
the tract to be approved prior to final map approval. All signing and striping
and traffic control devices shall be installed prior to final inspection of public
improvements. This includes Street Name Signs, No Parking and Street
Sweeping Signs for streets within the tract.
~
Page 11 of 15
AGeNDA tTEM~.~.
PACE 25~ :.0.: --lJ..L-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81+ acres for condominium purposes.
on APN 347-120-047
""""
75. A California Registered Civil Engineer shall prepare street and traffic
improvement plans and specifications. Improvements shall be designed and
constructed to Riverside County Road Department Standards, latest edition,
and City Codes (LEMC 12.04 and 16.34). Street improvement plans shall
show existing and future profiles at centerline of street, at top of curb and at
centerline of the alley. The profiles and contours will extend to 50 feet beyond
the property limits.
76. All Public Works improvements shall be complied with as a condition of
development as specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) prior
to final map approval. The improvements shall include street and drainage
improvements, street lighting, and associated traffic improvements related to
the project.
Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit
77. Submit grading plans with appropriate security, Hydrology and Hydraulic
Reports prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer for approval by the City
Engineer. Developer shall mitigate any flooding and/or erosion downstream
caused by development of the site and/or diversion of drainage.
....,
78. The grading plan shall show that no structures, landscaping, or equipment are
located near the project entrance on Ardenwood Way that minimizes sight
distance standards (design for 35 mph).
79. Construction Project access and hauling route shall be submitted and approved
by the City Engineer,
80. Provide soils, geology and seismic report including street design
recommendations. Provide final soils report showing compliance with
recommendations.
81. An Alquist-Priolo study shall be performed on the site to identify any hidden
earthquake faults and/or liquefaction zones present on-site.
Pagel2ofl5
....,
AGENDA 'TEM NO. 3
PAGE <6.b OF /1 b
",.-.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81 + acres for condominium purposes,
on APN 347-120-047
82. The applicant shall obtain all necessary off-site easements and/or permits for
off-site grading and/or drainage acceptance from the adjacent property owners
prior to grading permit issuance.
83. Applicant to provide erosion control measures as part of their grading plan.
The applicant shall contribute to protection of storm water quality and meet
the goals of the BMP in Supplement "A" in the Riverside County NPDES
Drainage Area Management Plan.
84. Applicant shall provide the city with proof of his having filed a Notice of
Intent with the Regional Water Quality Control Board for the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program with a storm water
pollution prevention plan prior to issuance of grading permits. The applicant
shall provide a SWPPP for post construction, which describes BMP's that will
be implemented for the development including maintenance responsibilities.
The applicant shall submit the SWPPP to the City for review and approval.
"....-
Prior to Issuance of Building Permit
85. All Public Works requirements shall be complied with as a condition of
development as specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) prior
to building permit.
86. Submit a "Will Serve" letter to the City Engineering Division from the
applicable water agency stating that water and sewer arrangements have been
made for this project and specify the technical data for the water service at the
location. such as water pressure and volume etc. Submit this letter prior to
applying for a building permit.
87. No structures, landscaping, or equipment shall be located near the project
entrance on Ardenwood Way that minimizes sight distance standards (design
for 35 mph).
88. Pay all Capital Improvement TIF and Master Drainage Fees and Plan Check
fees (LEMC 16.34).
-
Page 13 of 15
ACENDA 11tWI~..3.-.
PAOE:LL~--1.lL
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81+ acres for condominium purposes.
on APN 347-120-047
,....,
Prior to Occupancy
89. Pay all fees and meet requirements of an encroachment permit issued by the
Engineering Division for construction of off-site public works improvements
(LEMCI2.08, Res.83-78). All fees and requirements for an encroachment
permit shall be fulfilled before Certificate of Occupancy.
90. All compaction reports, grade certifications, monument certifications (with tie
notes delineated on 8 II2" x II" Mylar) shall be submitted to the Engineering
Division before final inspection of off-site improvements will be scheduled
and approved.
91. All public improvements shall be completed in accordance with the approved
plans to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
92. All signing and striping and traffic control devices shall be installed. This
includes Street Name Signs, No Parking and Street Sweeping Signs for streets
within the tract.
,....,
93. Water and sewer improvements shall be completed in accordance with Water
District requirements.
94. The traffic signal at Ardenwood Way and SR74 and warranted signals at the
project entrance( s) shall be operational.
95. All open space, slopes, and flood control facilities, outside the public right-of-
way shall be owned and maintained by homeowner's association. Proof of
acceptance of maintenance responsibility shall be provided.
96. TUMF fees shall be paid. The TUMF fees shall be the effective rate at the
time when the Certificate of Occupancy is obtained.
Page 14 of 15
,....,
ACENDAnnt~~.
PAGE CZ7> =QF~
r
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34231
A one-lot subdivision of 13.81+ acres for condominium purposes,
on APN 347-120-047
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
97. Prior to the approval of the Final Map, the developer shall annex into the
Mello-Roos Community Facilities District 2006-5 to fund the on-going
operation and maintenance of the new parks, open space and public storm
drains constructed as a result of the development and federal NPDES
requirements to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project.
Applicant shall make a four thousand dollar ($4,000) non-refundable deposit
to cover the cost of the annexation process. Contact Dennis Anderson,
Harris & Associates at (949) 655-3900 x334 or danderson@harris-assoc.com
r'
98. Prior to the approval of the Final Map, the developer shall annex into Lighting
and Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 to offset the annual negative fiscal
impacts of the project on public right-of-way landscaped areas to be
maintained by the City and for street lights in the public right-of-way for
which the City will pay for electricity and a maintenance fee to Southern
California Edison. Applicant shall make a four thousand five hundred dollar
($4,500) non-refundable deposit to cover the cost of the annexation process.
Contact Dennis Anderson, Harris & Associates at (949) 655-3900 x334 or
danderson@harris-assoc.com
(End of Conditions)
~
Page 15 ofl5
AGENDA ITEM NO...3 -rr-
PACE <b1 OF I
, , v:
I Iii
;1:.' fa;
~"" !C i :i.1 OJ
ul ~'.;'
ISlI !i ~ I
~( II
Ii; I n. ·
I~ ~d L"..."
-~ ~",... ...-
I
I Ii i
I,II!~ II!! I IiI ~lii III! -
bllll.1t I!n I"~ i
,.',
I' , 'Iill !
I .' I
II! II II I -. ·
!I 11(1 je.1 jl. .... IZ~I'I
!I,MIIII.III!! till! I iiilililll .!
- i ~ i~1111
;. i hJ
I ',II
<D '.!ill-
~L-I. ~: 'I'
1--;~7 e I'!::"
..ld!P
~ IIII ~ '11111
.111111
I IlIlh." Ill, "I
. . . .. '.0 III n
Ii. i
I iiil .: .11
i mli el1ld "
111'1 m.' .: I
II n i Illml!lUl5!
--I'il ~ i 11\1
.1 i-ii=I., 1;1'
i5~1i:1511;!;!I'il
~!I~~i'~ ~dllll
,'",.n
~ligl!!~:ii:i;ifl
II; ~11~!bl"
. "lla"al'll
.\\.;I!i\I~\ ..
I';!il~il!i~il;i
1111!h\''',.:'.
! 11:II!fllll!~
II-
~~lDJd
~--o
RESOLUTION NO. 2006- _
C3
\../'~
,r-
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2005-24 FOR
"TRIESTE" BY MBK HOMES, FOR 121 SINGLE FAMILY
CONDOMINIUMS WITHIN TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO.
34231
WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Lake Elsinore by
MBK Homes requesting Design Review approval to construct 121 single family
residential condominiums, including a 3-plan model home complex, swimming
pool, tot lots, barbecues and trail system within Tentative Tract Map No. 34231,
located on the southwest comer of Highway 74 and Rosetta Canyon Drive, east of
Interstate 15, and northeast of Ardenwood Way, and known as Assessor's Parcel
Nos. 347-120-016 and -022;and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has
been delegated with the responsibility of approving Design Review requests for
residential projects; and
/"'"'
WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given, and the
Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community
Development Department and other interested parties at a public meeting held with
respect to this item on August 1, 2006.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LAKE ELSIN.ORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE
AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the proposed
design for the 121 homes with 3-plan model home complex and has found them
acceptable. The Planning Commission has considered Addendum No. 3 to the
Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No.
88090525) for the Ramsgate Specific Plan No. 89-1, and the Mitigation Measures
thereto. The Addendum was prepared pursuant to Section 15164(a) of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. Appropriate findings
were made, and the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council
certify the Addendum.
/"'"'
AGENDA ITSt NO. , :;} I h
PACE t11 OF I
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
PAGE20F3
SECTION 2. That in accordance with Section 17.82 (Design Review) of
the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, the following findings for the approval of
Residential Design Review No. 2005-20 have been made as follows:
1. The project as conditioned will comply with the goals and objectives of the
Ramsgate Specific Plan Fourth Revision, and therefore the City's General
Plan. The Specific Plan designates the site for Medium High Density
Residential (15 dwellings per acre), and the Design Review proposes 8.8
dwelling units per acre.
2. The project complies with the design directives of Ramsgate Specific Plan
No. 89-1 Fourth Revision and those pertinent directives contained in Section
17.82.060 and all other applicable provisions of the City Municipal Code.
Staff has reviewed the project with adjacent neighborhoods and finds that it
complements their quality of construction, provides a pleasing use of color
and materials, demonstrates a respect for privacy and views, and offers
visually attractive landscaping and open space amenities to its residents.
3. Conditions and safeguards pursuant to Section 17.82.070, including
guarantees and evidence of compliance with conditions, have been
incorporated into the approval of the subject project to ensure development of
the property in accordance with the objectives of this Chapter and the
planning district in which the site is located. Staff has provided conditions
regarding architectural design, landscaping, phasing, and fencing.
SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its
passage and adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this first day of August, 2006,
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
'-'
'-'
......"
AGENDA ITEM NO.~
PAGE q~OFJJk-
,.--
,.--
,.--
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-_
PAGE30F3
ATTEST:
Rolfe Preisendanz
Director of Community Development
Michael O'Neal, Chairman
City of Lake Elsinore
MStOA~j'J~:lI,/'=
-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT NO. 2005-
24, MBK HOMES "TRIESTE" ~ RAMS GATE, IN TRACT MAP 34231 ....,
PLANNING DIVISION
(Note: Fees listed in the Conditions of Approval are the best estimates available at
the time of approval. The exact fee amounts will be reviewed at the time of
building permit issuance and may be revised.)
1. Approval Expiration. Design Review approval for Residential Project No. R
2005-24 will lapse and be void unless a building permit is issued within one (1)
year of the Planning Commission approval date. The Community Development
Director may grant an extension of time for up to one (1) year prior to the
expiration of the initial Design Review. An application for a time extension and
required fee shall be submitted a minimum of one (1) month prior to the
expiration date.
2. Indemnitv. The Applicant shall defend, indemnifY, and hold harmless the City,
its officials, officers, employees, and/or agents from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City, its officials, officers, employees, or agents ....,
concerning the project attached hereto.
3. Notice Filinf!. The City intends to file a Notice of Determination with the
Riverside County Clerk's office within five business days from the approval of
this Design Review by the Planning Commission.
4. Revision to Plans. All site improvements shall be constructed as indicated on
the approved plotting plan and building elevations or as specified by these
Conditions of Approval. Any other revisions to the approved plotting plan or
building elevations shall be subject to approval of the Community Development
Director or designee.
a. All lots shall meet the minimum setback requirements of the Medium
High Density Residential Development Regulations of the Ramsgate
Specific Plan Fourth Revision. Where dimensions are missing on
conceptual plans, it is assumed that Precise Grading Plans will comply
with these setback requirements.
Page I of II
'WI'
AGENDA ITEM NO. , 3
PAGE 1r OF II h
/"'" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT NO. 2005-
24, MBK HOMES "TRIESTE" ~ RAMSGATE, IN TRACT MAP 34231
5. Use of Colors & Materials. Materials and colors depicted on the approved
materials boards shall be used unless modified by the applicant and approved
by the Community Development Director or designee.
6. Style & Color Distribution. Applicant shall submit, for review and approval
by the Community Development Director or his designee, a detailed Plotting
Plan prior to the issuance of building permits for each phase, which indicates the
style and color scheme to be used on each lot. Styles shall be evenly distributed
throughout the site. The identical product and/or color scheme shall not be
constructed directly across or adjacent to one another.
7. ADA Requirements. Applicant shall meet al~ American with Disabilities Act
requirements for access to the Model Home Complex.
8. Prior Approvals. Applicant shall comply with all requirements of the
underlying Tract Map No. 34231 and Tract 25479, unless superceded by these
conditions.
-----
a. Applicant shall comply with all relevant Mitigation Monitoring
Program requirements as set forth in Addendum No.3 to the Final
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SCH 88090525) for
Ramsgate Specific Plan No. 89-1. Applicant shall provide a
Mitigation Monitoring Program Report on a quarterly basis during
construction.
9. RDA: This project is not within a designated Redevelopment Agency Project
Area.
10.Hours of Construction. The developer shall comply with Chapter 17.78,
Noise Control, of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. In addition, construction
shall be limited to the hours of 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., Monday through Friday. No
construction activity shall be allowed on Saturdays, Sundays or legal holidays.
It is the developer's responsibility to ensure that contractors and subcontractors
at the project site comply on his behalf.
-----
11. Violations. Upon violation by the applicant of the City's Noise Ordinance or
Page 2 of II
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
PAGE 15 OF (1 b
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT NO. 2005-
24, MBK HOMES "TRIESTE" @ RAMSGATE, IN TRACT MAP 34231 '-'
Condition of Approval No. 10, the applicant shall cease all construction
activities and shall be permitted to recommence such activities only upon
depositing with the City a $5,000 cash deposit available to be drawn upon by
the City to fund any future law enforcement needs that may be caused by
potential project construction violations and the enforcement of the City's
Noise Ordinance and Condition of Approval No. 10. The applicant shall
replenish the deposit upon notice by the City that the remaining balance is
equal to or less than $1,000.
12. Construction Trailers. A cash bond of $1,000.00 shall be required for any
construction trailers used during construction. Bonds will be released after
removal of trailers and restoration of the site to an acceptable state, subject to
the approv,!-l of the Community Development Director or designee.
13. Construction Pbasinf!. Construction phasing plans shall be implemented to
avoid construction traffic from entering occupied neighborhoods within the
tract.
""'"
a. After occupancy of units in Phase 1, construction vehicles shall use
the secondary access driveway or "F" Drive to reach Phases 2 and 3.
b. Construction vehicles shall use "F" Drive to access Phases 5 and 6.
14. EVMWD. The project shall connect to sewer and meet all requirements for
water availability of the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD).
Applicant shall submit water and sewer plans to the EVMWD and shall
incorporate all district conditions and standards, including payment of
applicable water and sewer connection fees.
15. Garaf!es. Garages shall be constructed to provide a minimum of nine- feet- six-
inches by nineteen-feet-six-inches (9'-6" x 19'-6") of interior clear space for two
cars for a total interior clear space of nineteen-feet-six inches by nineteen-feet-
six-inches (19'-6" X 19'-6").
16. Walls & Fences. All theme walls are required to be coated with anti-graffiti
paint.
Page 3 of II
'-'
ACENDA ITEM NO. ~
PAGE q);, Of II b
r'
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT NO. 2005-
24. MBK HOMES "TRIESTE" @ RAMSGA TE. IN TRACT MAP 34231
17. Any retaining walls visible to the public shall match the interior masonry
block walls in color and style.
18. Construction drawings shall use clearly identifiable and distinguishable
symbols for the different types of walls and fences proposed. Construction
drawings shall be reviewed to ensure inclusion of these Conditions of
Approval.
19. Construction drawings shall indicate that wall returns and walls fronting the
street between residential units shall be constructed of masonry block, and
match up to project block walls or residential buildings in col~r, texture and
style.
20. Walls or fences located in any front yard shall not exceed thirty-six inches
(36") in height with the exception that wrought-iron fences may be five feet
(5') in height. Chain link fences shall be prohibited.
r'
21. Construction drawings shall indicate the replacement of wood or block wall
with tubular steel view fencing on slopes.
22. Any tubular steel view fence installed shall be of industrial-grade material for
safety purposes.
23. Construction drawings for Interior Wood Fence shall comply with the City
Standard Drawing Exhibit' A.'
24. A six-foot (6') decorative block wall shall be required along all side and rear
property lines of the subdivision in compliance with the standards in Zoning
Code Section 17.14.130.D. A "Wall and Fencing Plan" shall be submitted for
the entire project prior to the issuance of any building permits, subject to the
review and approval of the Community Development Director or his designee.
Through this review process, it shall be determined if any existing fences need
to be replaced. The applicant shall work with the existing adjacent property
owners to coordinate any necessary replacement of existing fences/block walls.
~
Page 4 of) I
AGSIDA ITEM NO. .? v.
PAGE q7 OF II h
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT NO. 2005-
24. MBK HOMES "TRIESTE" ~ RAMS GATE. IN TRACT MAP 34231 .....".
25. FMZ. The applicant shall abide by the approved Fuel Modification Plan for
Tract 25479, and all conditions of approval of said tract.
26. Four-sided Articulation. Full architectural treatments as depicted on exhibits
or conditioned by these conditions of approval, shall be required for both the
first and second story elevations. The applicant may submit to the Community
Development Director or his designee, for review and approval, evidence that a
particular elevation is hidden from public view, and in those instances, to be
determined by the Community Development Director or his designee on a case-
by-case basis, this condition may be waived. Elevations visible from the
community trail or as a result of elevation changes between homes will not be
considered for waiver of this condition.
27.Fire Department Primary & Secondary Access. The applicant shall consult
with the Building and Safety Manager and Riverside County Fire Department in
order to meet primary and secondary access requirements of that agency during
all phases of construction once combustibles are brought to the site. The ....."
applicant shall meet all applicable County Fire Department requirements for
fire protection of the project site.
28. Si2na2e. All signage shall be reviewed and approved by the Community
Development Director or his designee, and shall require the issuance of a Sign
Permit as appropriate.
a. Applicant shall install neighborhood entry monumentation and
landscaping prior to the first Certificate of Occupancy for both the
Ardenwood and Rosetta Canyon comers of the project. Construction
drawings shall include their location, size, identification, color and
materials, in compliance with the Design Guidelines of the Ramsgate
Specific Plan.
29. CC&Rs. The applicant shall initiate and complete the formation of a
homeowners' association (HOA) and provide to the City for review and
approval Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for said HOA, prior
to release of building permits.
Page 5 of II
.....,
ACENDA IlEM NO.~
PACE 9<6 ~
"......
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT NO. 2005-
24. MBK HOMES "TRIESTE" @ RAMSGATE. IN TRACT MAP 34231
a. All open space areas, picnic areas, tot lot, walking trails, maintenance
easements, detention basins and drainage facilities shall be maintained
by the HOA excepting underground storm drain pipes.
b. All HOA documents shall be approved by the City and recorded, such
as the Articles of Incorporation and CC&Rs.
c. CC&Rs shall prohibit on-street storage of boats, motor homes, trailers
and trucks over one-ton capacity.
d. CC&Rs shall prohibit roof-mounted or front-yard microwav.e satellite
antennas.
e. All lettered lots shall be owned and maintained by the HOA and so
noted on the Final Map.
.,--...
Prior to Issuance of Building/Grading Permits
30.Acknowlede:ment of Conditions. Prior to issuance of any precise grading
permits or building permits, the applicant shall sign and complete an
"Acknowledgment of Conditions" and shall return the executed original to the
Community Development Department for inclusion in the case records.
31.Gradine: Ordinance Compliance. Applicant shall comply with all
requirements of the City's Grading Ordinance. Construction generated dust and
erosion shall be mitigated in accordance with the provisions of Municipal Code,
Chapter 15.72 and using accepted control techniques. Interim erosion control
measures shall be provided thirty (30) days after the site's rough grading, as
approved by the City Engineer.
32.Plancheck Submittal. These Conditions of Approval shall be reproduced upon
Page One of the Building Plans prior to their acceptance by the Building and
Safety Division.
.,--...
Page 6 of II
ACENDo\ 111M NO. -;3 :
PAGE q1 .OF II b
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT NO. 2005-
24, MBK HOMES "TRIESTE" @ RAMS GATE, IN TRACT MAP 34231 "-'
33.UBC. The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Building
Division building plans that are designed to current UBC and adopted codes,
and meet all applicable Building and Safety Division requirements.
34. Trash Concrete Pads. Applicant shall provide a flat concrete pad or area a
minimum of 3'- 0" by 7'- 0" adjacent to each dwelling. The storage pad or area
shall conceal the trash barrels from public view, subject to the approval of the
Community Development Director or his designee.
35.Drivewavs. Driveways shall be constructed of concrete per Building and
Safety Division standards.
36.Buildine Addresses. The building addresses shall be a minimum of four
inches (4") high and shall be easily visible from the public right-of-way.
Developer shall obtain street addresses for all project lots prior to issuance of
building permits. The addresses (in numerals at least four inches (4" high) shall
be displayed near the entrance and be visible from the front of the unit. Care
should be taken to select colors and materials that contract with building walls ...",
or trim.
3 7 .Meetine with Contractor. Prior to Building Permits the Construction
Supervisor shall meet with the Planning Division to review the Conditions of
Approval.
38.Landscape & Irrh!ation Plans. Landscaping Plans and Irrigation Details for
each plan shall be required, Typical Front Yard Plans and a Cost Estimate shall
be submitted for review and approval by the City's Landscape Architect
Consultant and the Community Development Director or Designee prior to
issuance of building permits. A Landscape Plan Check Fee and Inspection Fee
shall be paid for the entire project at the time of submittal.
Page 7 of II
....."
AWI::r ~ ': /I,b -
~ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT NO. 2005-
24. MBK HOMES "TRlESTE" au RAMS GATE. IN TRACT MAP 34231
a. Street Trees. The applicant shall install street trees to match existing
street trees a maximum of thirty feet (30') apart, and at least twenty-
four inch (24") box in size. The applicant shall be discouraged from
using Canary Island Pine because they tend to grow too big in this
climate for street trees. The applicant shall be discouraged from using
Evergreen Pear because they are susceptible to fire blight in this area.
If London Plane trees are used, the best variety for this area is the
"Blood Good."
b. Si2ht Visibilitv. Planting within fifteen feet (15') of ingress/egress
points shall be no higher than thirty-six-inches (36").
c. Water Conservation. The landscape plan shall provide for ground
cover, shrubs, and trees and meet all requirements of the City's
. adopted Landscape Guidelines. Special attention to the use of
Xeriscape or. drought resistant plantings with combination drip
.....- irrigation system to be used to prevent excessive watering.
d. Easements. Landscaping shall be shown and installed on both sides
of any drainage easements not within a residential lot.
e. Draina2e facilities. Particular attention shall be given to the
screening of drainage facilities from public view or adjacent
residences.
f. Downslopes. Down slopes adjacent to streets shall be planted and
irrigated by the developer and maintained by the HOA.
g. Model Complex. Appropriate landscaping shall be designed and
provided at the model site.
39.Xeriscape Demonstration. One of the proposed lots of the Model Home
Complex shall be Xeriscaped and signage provided that identifies Xeriscape
landscaping.
~,
40.LEUSD. Under the provisions of SB 50, the applicant shall pay school fees to
Page 8 of II
ACENDA ITEM NO. 3
PAGE {01 OF /th
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT NO. 2005-
24. MBK HOMES "TRIESTE" @ RAMSGATE. IN TRACT MAP 34231 ~
the Lake Elsinore Unified School District prior to issuance of building permits.
The applicant shall provide evidence that all required school fees have been
paid.
41.Park Fees. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall pay park-
in-lieu fees in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
42.Ground Mounted Equipment. All mechanical and electrical equipment on
the building shall be ground mounted. All outdoor ground or wall mounted
utility equipment shall be consolidated in a central location and architecturally
screened along with substantial landscaping, subject to the approval of the
Community Development Director, prior to issuance of building permits. If the
equipment is placed behind the fencing, landscaping will not be required. Air
conditioning and related equipment located in side yards shall maintain a
minimum of 3 feet of unobstructed, leveled clearance between the equipment
and the adjacent property line.
Prior to Final Approval
'-'
43.Issuance of Occupancy. The applicant shall meet all Conditions of Approval
prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and release of utilities.
44.Painted Fencinl!. Prior to final approval, all wood fencing shall be painted or
treated with a high-grade, solid body, penetrating stain approved by the
Community Development Director or his designee.
45.Landscapinl! & Irril!ation Installed. All front yards and the side yards on
comer lots shall be properly landscaped and irrigated with an automatic
underground irrigation system to provide 100% plant and grass coverage using
a combination of drip and conventional irrigation methods.
a. Bond for Model Complex. All landscape improvements for the
Model Home Complex shall be bonded for labor and materials for 2
years with a 120% Faithful Performance Bond prior to final
approval of the Model Home Complex. A paper bond shall be
acceptable. The bond will be released two (2) years from the date of
Page 9 of II
'-'
ACENDA ITEM NO.~
PAGE I 0 ~OF..1flz..
~
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT NO. 2005-
24. MBK HOMES "TRlESTE" @ RAMSGATE. IN TRACT MAP 34231
the last Certificate of Occupancy.
b. Phasint!. All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed within an
affected portion of any phase at the time a Certificate of Occupancy
is requested for any building.
c. Consistency with Approved Plans. Final landscape plan must be
consistent with the approved site plan.
d. Slope Landscapint!. All exposed slopes in excess of three feet in
height within the subject tract and within private lots shall have a
permanent irrigation system and erosion control vegetation installed,
as approved by the Landscape Architect and Planning Division, prior
to issuance of certificate of occupancy.
e.
Open Space. All adjacent Open Space areas shall be completely
landscaped and restored if graded, prior to issuance of a Certificate
of Occupancy for the adjacent phase.
r---
f. Landscape Bond. All landscape improvements shall be bonded with
a 100 percent Faithful Performance Bond for labor and materials
for two years from Certificate of Occupancy.
ENGINEERING DIVISION
The Conditions of Approval for underlying Tentative Tract Map No. 34231 shall
apply to this Design Review.
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
46.Prior to approval of the Final Map, Parcel Map, Site Development Plan, or
Special Use Permit (as applicable), the developer shall annex into Lighting and
Landscaping Maintenance District No. 1 to offset the annual negative fiscal
impacts of the project on public right-of-way landscaped areas to be maintained
r---
Page 10 of! J
AC~O'j' '~ {If,: :
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT NO. 2005-
24. MBK HOMES "TRIESTE" @RAMSGATE. IN TRACT MAP 34231 '-'"
by the City and for street lights in the public right-of-way for which the City
will pay for electricity and a maintenance fee to Southern California Edison.
Applicant shall make a four thousand five hundred dollar ($4,500) non-
refundable deposit to cover the cost of the annexation process. Contact Dennis
Anderson, Harris & Associates at (949) 655-3900 Extension 334 or
danderson@harris-assoc.com.
'-'
Page II of II
'-'
ACENOA l1!IIllO. . ;
PAGE I OLf.. , OF 1I b
-
r-
q ~ 0 It?rwe-J '
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-. b9.
Uo-r CovtJ"~~f ()Vl spA-
\.'- FovV,f-h r2:eu;" ;0"1 ~
/
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP NO. 25475, REVISION NO.1, A SUBDIVISION
OF 132 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS
AND EIGHT (8) OPEN SPACE LOTS, ON
APPROXIMATELY 37.3+ ACRES LOCATED
WEST OF GREENWALD, EAST OF GRASSY
MEADOW DRIVE, SOUTH OF SCENIC CREST
DRIVE, WITHIN THE RAMSGATE SPECIFIC
PLAN, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NOS. 349-240-034, -038, -072, AND -075.
~
WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Lake
Elsinore by The Shopoff Group to subdivide 37.3+ acres of unimproved
property into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore
has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to
the City Council pertaining to the subdivision of land; and
WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given, and the
Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community
Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing
held with respect to this item on August 1, 2006.
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 proposed
Tentative Tract Map No. 25475, Revision No.1 prior to making a decision
to recommend that the City Council approve the proposal to subdivide
approximately 37.3 + acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space
lots. Pursuant to Section 21080 (c)(2) of the California Environmental
AGENDA ITEM NO.~
PAGE '1S OF 1'.0
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475, REVISION NO.1
AUGUST 1, 2006
Page 2 of4
~
Quality Act (CEQA), the Planning Commission finds and determines that
Addendum No. 3 to the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report
(SCH No. 88090525) is adequate and prepared in accordance with the
requirements of CEQA which analyzes environmental effects of the
proposed project.
SECTION 2. That in accordance with State of California
Subdivision Map Act, and the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code the
following findings for the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 25475
Revision No. 1 have been made as follows:
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP FINDINGS:
1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and
improvements, is consistent with the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan.
The proposed subdivision is compatible with the objectives, policies,
general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan
(Government Code Section 66473.5).
~
a. The design of the proposed subdivision and density of 3.5 dwelling
units per acre are consistent with the Ramsgate Specific Plan Third or
Fourth Revision, and therefore with the General Plan.
b. The project proposes single family residential lots ranging in size
from 5,000 squarefeet to 12,156 squarefeet, with an average lot size
of 6,592 square feet, which is consistent with the SP.
2. The site of the proposed division of land is physically suitable for the
proposed density of development in accordance with the General Plan.
a. The General Plan encourages clustered development in order to
facilitate the conservation of identified wildlife corridors and habitat.
The project density and design is compatible with proposed or
approved maps to the north and east.
b. The map provides open space areas that protect the natural
topography and views.
"'"
ACENDA I1!M NO. '~ -
PACE 11 h OF /I b
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475, REVISION NO.1
AUGUST 1, 2006
~ Page3of4
3. The effects that this project are likely to have upon the housing needs of
the region, the public service requirements of its residents and the
available fiscal and environmental resources have been considered and
balanced.
a. The project is consistent with the City's General Plan. During the
approval of City's General Plan, housing needs, public services and
fiscal resources were scrutinized to achieve a balance within the City.
b. The map has been conditioned to annex into Community Facilities
District 2003-01 to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the
project on public safety operations and maintenance issues in the
City.
~
c. The map has been conditioned to annex into Lighting and Landscape
Maintenance District No. 1 to offset the annual negative fiscal
impacts of the project on public right-ol-way landscaped areas to be
maintained by the City, and for street lights in the public right-ol-way
for which the City will pay for electricity and a maintenance fee to
Southern California Edison.
d. The map has been conditioned to form a Mello-Roos Community
Facilities District to fund the on-going operation and maintenance of
the new parks, parkways, open space and public storm drains
constructed with in the development andfederal NPDES requirements
to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project.
4. The design of the proposed division of land or type of improvements is
not likely to cause serious public health problems.
a. Tentative Tract Map No. 25475 Revision No. 1 is conditioned to
comply with all development standards of the Ramsgate Specific Plan
Third or Fourth Revision. These standards have been prepared and
reviewed to benefit the public health, safety and welfare.
~
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3-
PAGE 41 ~
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475, REVISION NO.1
AUGUST 1, 2006
Page 4 of4
...".;'
5. The design of the proposed division of land or the type of improvements
will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for
access through or use of property within the proposed division of land.
a. All known easements or requests for access have been incorporated
into Tentative Tract Map No. 25475 Revision No.1.
b. The map has been circulated to City departments and outside
agencies, and appropriate conditions of approval have been applied
for their approval during construction.
SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the
date of its passage and adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this first day of August,
2006, by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
..".;'
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
Michael O'Neal, Chairman
Lake Elsinore Planning Commission
ATTEST:
Rolfe M. Preisendanz, Director of Community Development
""""
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
PAGE '1~ OF II h
/'"'
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on APNs 340-240-034. -038, -072 and -075
PLANNING DIVISION
1. Tentative Tract Map No. 25475 Revision No.1 will expire with the expiration
of the applicable Development Agreement for Ramsgate and its accompanying
Operating Memorandum(s) of Understanding, unless within that period of
time a final map has been filed with the County Recorder, or an extension of
time is granted by the City of Lake Elsinore City Council.
2. Tentative Tract Map No. 25475 Revision No.1 shall comply with the State of
California Subdivision Map Act and shall comply with all applicable
requirements of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, Title 16 unless modified
by approved C~nditions of Approval.
3. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its
officials, officers, employees, and/or agents from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City, its officials, officers, employees, or agents
..-- concerning the project attached hereto.
4. The City intends to file a Notice of Determination with the Riverside County
Clerk's office within five (5) business days from the approval of this map by
the City Council. The applicant shall forward to the Planning Department
secretary, a check made payable to the Riverside County Clerk, in the amount
of $914.00 to pay for the cost of such filing. This check shall be received by
the secretary no more than 48 hours from the approval by the Council.
5. The applicant shall provide to the Community Development Director within
30 days of approval, a final approved version of the project in digitized
format.
6. The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program (MMRP) adopted for this project, as printed with Addendum No.3 to
the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for Ramsgate Specific
Plan No. 89-1, unless superceded by these Conditions.
--
Page 1 of 18
ACENOA lTn1 NO. > =)
PACe Lf~ OF l'b
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on APNs 340-240-034. -038, -072 and -075
.....,
7. The applicant shall fund the implementation of the MMRP through every
stage of development. The City shall appoint an environmental monitor who
shall periodically inspect the project site, documents submitted by the
applicant, permits issued, and any other pertinent material, in order to monitor
and report compliance to the City until the completion of the project.
8. This map must comply with the Development Standards and Design
Guidelines approved with the Ramsgate Specific Plan No. 89-1 Fourth
Revision (SP). Construction of the property is subject to all the Conditions of
Approval of the SP unless superceded by these conditions.
a. All lots shall comply with the minimum standards contained in the
residential Development Regulations contained in the SP, including
lot frontage minimums and comer lot requirements.
b. Where the SP is silent, Title 16 and 17 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal
Code shall apply.
.....,
9. Construction on the property covered by this map is subject to the terms and
conditions of the Development Agreement and accompanying Operating
Memorandum( s) of Understanding for the Ramsgate Specific Plan.
10. The applicant shall sign and return an "Acknowledgment of Conditions" to the
Community Development Department within 30 days of the tentative map
approval by the City Council.
PRIOR TO FINAL TRACT MAP:
11. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Riverside County Fire
Department as specified in the Department transmittal dated March 8, 2006,
attached.
12. A precise survey with closures for boundaries and all lots shall be provided
per the LEMC.
Page 2 of 18
.....,
AGENDA ITEM NO.~_~
PAGE,,?O~
CONDITIONS OF AFFROV AL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAF NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
,.......... A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on APNs 340-240-034. -038. -072 and -075
13. The applicant's engineer shall coordinate the design of Scenic Crest Drive
. with development of Tentative Tract Map No. 31370 at the direction of the
City Engineer.
14. The applicant shall identify and design a trail access from Scenic Crest Drive
to the Open Space Wildlife Corridor, that includes dimensions, type of
materials used, and conceptual interpretive signage to be installed.
15. Street names within the subdivision shall be approved by the Community
Development Director or designee prior to final map approval.
16. All of the improvements shall be designed by the developer's Civil Engineer
to the specifications of the City of Lake" Elsinore.
~
17. The applicant shall initiate and complete the formation of a homeowners'
association approved by the City, recorded and in place. All Association
documents shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded, such as
the Articles of Incorporation and Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions
(CC&Rs). The HOA shall be responsible for the maintenance of all open
space areas and maintenance easement areas. The HOA shall maintain or
coordinate with an appropriate agency approved by the Community
Development Director, for such maintenance.
a. In the event that the Homeowners' Association fails to meet its
responsibilities with regards to the maintenance of open space areas,
the Lighting, Landscaping and Maintenance District shall
automatically provide such maintenance and assess the HOA for such
servIce.
b. CC&Rs shall prohibit on-street storage of boats, motor homes,
trailers, and trucks over one-ton capacity.
c. CC&Rs shall prohibit roof-mounted or front-yard microwave satellite
antennas.
--.
Page 3 of 18
ACEHDA ffE\1 No.3
PAGE . ~l OF / 1 b
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on APNs 340-240-034. -038. -072 and -075
'-'
d. The developer shall provide landscaped areas on both sides of any
access roadways within the tract, and the landscaped areas shall be
maintained by the HOA.
18. All lettered lots shall be owned and maintained by the HOA or other entity
approved by the Community Development Director and so noted on the Final
Map.
19. The Final Map shall identify downslopes adjacent to streets as open space lots
maintained by the HOA or as HOA Maintenance Easements. These HOA
Maintenance Easements shall be planted, irrigated and maintained by the
HOA. Where such slopes are within MSHCP Conservation areas, the applicant
shall confer with the Community Development Director or his designee
regarding appropriate methods to re-establish natural vegetation, consistent
with the MSHCP Guidelines.
PRIOR TO GRADING AND BUILDING PERMITS:
'-'
20. Thirty days prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit to
the Community Development Department a burrowing owl survey for review
and acceptance by the City.
21. The City's Noise Ordinance shall be met during all site preparation activity.
Construction shall not commence before 7:00 a.m. and shall cease at 5:00
p.m., Monday through Friday. Construction activity shall not take place on
Saturday, Sunday or any legal holidays.
22. Upon violation by the applicant of the City's Noise Ordinance or Condition of
Approval # 19, applicant shall cease all construction activities and shall be
permitted to recommence such activities only upon depositing with the City a
$5,000 cash deposit available to be drawn upon by the City to fund any future
law enforcement needs that may be caused by potential project construction
violations and the enforcement of the City's Noise Ordinance and Condition
of Approval # 19. The applicant shall replenish the deposit upon notice by the
City that the remaining balance is equal to or less than $1,000.
Page 4 of ) 8
.,-,
AGENDA ITEM NO.~
PACE 5d-~
/""
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on APNs 340-240-034. -038. -072 and -075
23. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall pay the City's
Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Local Development Mitigation
Fee in effect at that time. The current fee for residential development with a
density of less than 8.0 dwelling units per acre is $1,651 per dwelling unit.
24. The Ramsgate SP project area is not within a Redevelopment Agency
designated area.
25. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Lake Elsinore Unified
School District under the provisions of SB 50, wherein the owner or developer
shall pay school fees or enter into a mitigation agreement prior t? the issuance
of a certificate of compliance by the District.
26. The applicant shall provide connection to public sewer for each lot within the
subdivision. No service laterals shall cross adjacent property lines and shall be
,-. delineated on engineering sewer plans and profiles for submittal to the
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD).
27. All storm drains are to be maintained in accordance with the cooperative
agreement with the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District.
a. The homeowners' association shall maintain water quality basins,
landscaping, and open space drainage.
28. The developer shall submit plans to the electric utility company to layout the
street lighting system. The cost of street lighting, installation, and energy
charges shall be the responsibility of the developer and/or the Association
until streets are accepted by the City. Said plans shall be approved by the City
and installed in accordance with City Standards.
29. The applicant shall meet all requirements of the providing electric utility
company.
"..--...
Page 5 of 18
AlOENDA In;:NO. 3 )
PAGE ~ Of I ~
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on APNs 340-240-034. -038, -072 and -075
.~
30. The applicant shall meet all requirements of the providing gas utility company.
31. The applicant shall meet all requirements of the providing telephone utility
company.
32. A bond is required guaranteeing the removal of all trailers used during
construction.
33. All signage shall be subject to Planning Division review and approval prior to
installation.
34. Landscape Plans for the tract shall include vegetative screening of retention
basins and both sides of service roads and drainage easements.
35. Any alterations to the topography, ground sur(ace, or any other site
preparation activity will require appropriate grading permits. A Geologic Soils
Report with associated recommendations will be required for grading permit
approval, and all grading must meet the City's Grading Ordinance, subject to .....,
the approval of the City Engineer and the Planning Division. Analysis of
impacts of fills and cuts greater than sixty feet (60') shall be provided. Interim
and permanent erosion control measures are required. The applicant shall bond
100% for material and labor for one (1) year for erosion control landscaping at
the time the site is rough graded.
PRIOR TO DESIGN REVIEW:
36. All future structural development associated with this map requires separate
Design Review approval.
37. Elevation drawings for Design Review shall include four-sided architectural
features for both the first and second story. The applicant may submit to the
Community Development Director or his designee, for review and approval,
evidence that a particular elevation is hidden from public view and not visible
due to elevation changes. In those instances, to be determined by the
Page 60fI8
~
AGEIIDA ITEM NO. 3 ~
P~E5L.Of ) /
~
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots.
on APNs 340-240-034. -038, -072 and -075
Community Development Director or his designee on a case-by-case basis,
this condition may be waived.
38. Slopes on individual lots that are in excess of three feet in height shall be
installed, landscaped and irrigated by the developer prior to the issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy.
39. Downslopes adjacent to streets shall be maintained by the HOA.
40. A detailed fencing plan shall be required for review and approval during the
Design Review process.
a. The applicant shall install walls and fencing along the perimeter of the
subdivision in accordance with the approved Design Guidelines for
the Ramsgate Specific Plan.
~
b.
Where views to open space are important, the applicant shall provide
the appropriate view fencing.
41. A detailed phasing plan shall be required for review and approval during the
Design Review process.
a. Construction phasing plans shall include the location of construction
fencing for each phase.
b. Construction phasing plans shall indicate primary and secondary access
and the location of all utilities for each phase.
c. Construction phasing plans shall be designed to avoid construction traffic
from entering occupied neighborhoods to the greatest extent possible. For
safety purposes construction phasing plans shall also be designed such that
new residents can avoid traveling through construction areas.
,--
Page 7 of 18
AGENDA ntMNO.~
PAGE 55~
/
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots.
on APNs 340-240-034. -038, -072 and -075
....,
42. Primary and secondary access roads for each phase as identified on the map
"Fire Access Table" shall be fully constructed and open to the public prior to
the issuance of the Certificates of Occupancy for each phase of the tract.
ENGINEERING DIVISION
General Requirements:
43. A grading plan signed and stamped by a Calif. Registered Civil Engineer shall
be required if the grading exceeds 50 cubic yards or the existing flow pattern
is substantially modified as determined by the City Engineer. If the grading is
less than 50 cubic yards and a grading plan is not required, a grading permit
shall still be obtained so that a cursory drainage and flow pattern inspection
can be conducted before grading begins.
44. Prior to commencement of grading operations, applicant shall provide to the
City a map of all proposed haul routes to be used for movement of export ....,
material. Such routes shall be subject to the review and approval of the City
Engineer.
45. All grading shall be done under the supervision of a geotechnical engineer and
he shall certify all slopes steeper than 2 to 1 for stability and proper erosion
control. All manufactured slopes greater than 30 ft. in height shall be
contoured.
46. This project shall comply with the recommendations of the traffic study
prepared by Urban Crossroads dated October 24, 2005.
47. Provide Tract Phasing Plan for the City Engineer's approval. Bond public
improvements for each Phase as approved by the City Engineer.
48. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained prior to any work on City right-of-
way.
Page 8 of 18
......."
ACENDA 111M NO. 3 b ~
PAGE .7b OF. II.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
r' A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on APNs 340-240-034. -038. -072 and -075
49. Arrangements for relocation of utility company facilities (power poles, vaults,
etc.) out of the roadway or alley shall be the responsibility of the property
owner or his agent. Overhead utilities shall be undergrounded.
50. Underground water rights shall be dedicated to the City pursuant to the
provisions of Section 16.52.030 (LEMC), and consistent with the City's
agreement with the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District.
51. Applicant shall obtain any necessary County permits and meet all County
requirements for any work within County right-of-way.
52. The applicant shall install permanent bench marks per Riverside County
Standards and at locations to be determined by City Engineer.
53. Provide fire protection facilities as required in writing by Riverside County
Fire. The fuel
modification zone shall be maintained by a homeowner's association.
r---
54. Applicant shall pay all applicable development fees, including but not all
inclusive: TUMF, MSHCP, TIF and area drainage fees, subject to the
Development Agreement and Memorandums of Understanding in effect for
the Ramsgate Specific Plan.
55. Ten-year storm runoff shall be contained within the curb and the 100-year
storm runoff shall be contained within the street right-of-way. When either of
these criteria are exceeded, drainage facilities shall be provided.
56. All drainage facilities in this tract shall be constructed to Riverside County
Flood Control District Standards.
57. All compaction reports, grade certifications, monument certifications (with tie
notes delineated on 8 !;2" x 11" Mylar) shall be submitted to the Engineering
Division before final inspection of public works improvements will be
scheduled and approved.
",.--,
Page 9 of 18
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
PAGE c;7 OF /1 b
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on APNs 340-240-034. -038~ -072 and -075
~
58. Up-slope maintenance along right-of-ways shall be maintained by a
homeowner's association.
59. All open space and slopes except for public parks and schools and flood
control district facilities, outside the public right-of-way shall be owned and
maintained by homeowner's association or other entity approved by the
Community Development Director.
60. All waste material, debris, vegetation and other rubbish generated during
cleaning, demolition, clear and grubbing or other phases of the construction
shall be disposed of at appropriate recycling centers. The applicant should
contract with CR&R Inc. for recycling and storage container services, but the
applicant may use the services of another recycling vendor. Another recycling
vendor, other than CR&R Inc., cannot charge the applicant for bin rental or
solid waste disposal. If the applicant is not using CR&R Inc. for recycling
services and the recycling material is either sold or donated to another vendor,
the applicant shall supply proof of debris disposal at a recycling center,
including verification of tonnage by certified weigh master tickets.
...."
61. Some of the improvements shown on the Map and/or required by these
conditions are located in the County of Riverside and/or private owned. The
developer shall be responsible for obtaining County and/or private permits and
approvals needed to complete the required offsite improvements.
62. On-site drainage shall be conveyed to a public facility, accepted by adjacent
property owners by a letter of drainage acceptance, or conveyed to a drainage
easement.
63. All natural drainage traversing the site shall be conveyed through the site, or
shall be collected and conveyed by a method approved by the City Engineer.
64. Roof drains shall not be allowed to outlet directly through coring in the street
curb. Roofs should drain to a landscaped area.
Page 10 ofl8
~
AGENDA mM NO. ~
PAGE ~t OF (/ h
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
/"'""' A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots.
on APNs 340-240-034. -038, -072 and -075
65. Applicant shall comply with all NPDES requirements in effect; including the
submittal of an Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) as required per the
Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. The requirements of
WQMP may affect the overall layout of the project. Therefore, WQMP
submittal should be during the initial process of the project.
66. Education guidelines and Best Management Practices (BMP) shall be
provided to residents of the development in the use of herbicides, pesticides,
fertilizers as well as other environmental awareness education materials on
good housekeeping practices that contribute to protection of storm water
quality and meet the goals of the BMP in Supplement "A" in the Riverside
County NPDES Drainage Area Management Plan. (Required for lot of one
acre or more)
/"'"'
67. City of Lake Elsinore has adopted ordinances for storm water management
and discharge control. In accordance with state and federal law, these local
storm water ordinances prohibit the discharge of waste into storm drain
system or local surface waters. This includes non-storm water discharges
containing oil, grease, detergents, trash, or other waste remains. Brochures of
"Storm water Pollution, What You Should Know" describing preventing
measures are available at City Hall.
PLEASE NOTE: The discharge of pollutants into street, gutters, storm drain
system, or waterways -without Regional Water Quality Control Board permit or
waver - is strictly prohibited by local ordinances and state and federal law.
Prior to Approval of final Map, unless other timing is indicated, the
subdivider shall complete the following or have plans submitted and
approved, agreements executed and securities posted:
68. Construct Little Valley Road per County Standard 104A (60'/40'). The
horizontal curvature shall be designed at a minimum speed of 35mph.
69. Construct Marrelli Road per County Standard 104A (60'/40') or as shown in
the map.
/"""-
Page II of 18
AGENDA ITEM NO. ,3_
PAGe5q~
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on APNs 340-240-034. -038, -072 and -075
.....,
70. Construct Scenic Crest Drive per County Standard 104A (60'/40') or as shown
in the map.
71. A portion of Scenic Crest Drive, from A Street to Grassy Meadow Drive,
shall be improved as a trail access to the Open Space Corridor.
72. Improve the west side of Greenwald Avenue by constructing an additional
paved width of 20' per County Standard 102. Adequate transitions shall be
provided. Note: Should the existing structural section is found to be
substandard for a secondary road, the road improvements shall extend the half
width plus 12 feet, from the centerline of Greenwald Avenue.
73. Construct local streets "A" to "G" per County Standard 106A (60/40) or as
shown in the map.
74. The proposed temporary emergency/secondary access road shall be a
minimum of28' or as approved by the Fire Department. .....,
75. Applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City for the construction of
public works improvements and shall post the appropriate bonds prior to final
map approval.
76. Applicant shall obtain all necessary off-site easements for off-site grading
from the adjacent property owners prior to final map approval.
77. Provide street lighting and show lighting improvements as part of street
improvement plans as required by the City Engineer.
78. Make an offer of dedication for all public streets and easements required by
these conditions or shown on the Tentative Map. All land so offered shall be
granted to the City free and clear of all liens and encumbrances and without
cost to the city.
Page 12 of 18
.....,
AGENDA I1'EIf NO. 3 ~
PKJEbO OF/lh
""..--.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots.
on APNs 340-240-034. -038, -072 and -075
79. Applicant shall submit signing and striping plans for the required street
improvements and a traffic control plan showing all traffic control devices for
the tract to be approved prior to final map approval. All signing and striping
and traffic control devices shall be installed prior to final inspection of public
improvements. This includes Street Name Signs, No Parking and Street
Sweeping Signs for streets within the tract.
80. A Calif. Registered Civil Engineer shall prepare street and traffic improvement
plans and specifications. Improvements shall be designed and constructed to
Riverside County Road Department Standards, latest edition, and City Codes
(LEMC 12.04 and 16.34). Street improvement plans shall show existing and
future profiles at centerline of street, at top of curb and at centerline of the
alley. The profiles and contours will extend to 50' beyond the property limits.
81. All Public Works improvements shall be complied with as a condition of
development as specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) prior
____ to final map approval. The improvements shall include street and drainage
improvements, street lighting, and associated traffic improvements related to
the project.
Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit
82. If the grading is less than 50 cubic yards and a grading plan is not required, a
site plan that shows proposed project improvements and drainage patterns
shall be submitted so that a cursory drainage and flow pattern inspection can
be conducted before grading begins.
83. Submit grading plans with appropriate security, Hydrology and Hydraulic
Reports prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer for approval by the City
Engineer. Developer shall mitigate any flooding and/or erosion downstream
caused by development of the site and/or diversion of drainage.
84. Construction Project access and hauling route shall be submitted and approved
by the City Engineer,
----
Page 13 of 18
AGENDA IT!Ill NO.... ';j: -
PAGE-W-OF II j,
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots~
on APNs 340-240-034. -038. -072 and -075
~
85. Provide soils, geology and seismic report including street design
recommendations. Provide final soils report showing compliance with
recommendations.
86. An Alquist-Priolo study shall be performed on the site to identify any hidden
earthquake faults and/or liquefaction zones present on-site unless a registered
geologist provides verification that the project is exempt.
87. The applicant shall obtain all necessary off-site easements and/or permits for
off-site grading, improvements, and/or drainage acceptance from the adjacent
property owners prior to grading permit issuance.
88. Applicant to provide erosion control measures as part of their grading plan.
The applicant shall contribute to protection of storm water quality and meet
the goals of the BMP in Supplement "A" in the Riverside County NPDES
Drainage Area Management Plan.
89. Applicant shall provide the city with proof of his having filed a Notice of
Intent with the Regional Water Quality Control Board for the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program with a storm water
pollution prevention plan prior to issuance of grading permits. The applicant
shall provide a SWPPP for post construction, which describes BMP's that will
be implemented for the development including maintenance responsibilities.
The applicant shall submit the SWPPP to the City for review and approval.
~
Prior to Issuance of Building Permit
90. All Public Works requirements shall be complied with as a condition of
development as specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) prior
to building permit.
91. Submit a "Will Serve" letter to the City Engineering Division from the
applicable water agency stating that water and sewer arrangements have been
made for this project and specify the technical data for the water service at the
Page 14 of 18
......,
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
PAGE /; 'J- OF [{ ~
.-
r--
CONDITIONS OF AFFROV AL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on AFNs 340-240-034. -038, -072 and -075
location. such as water pressure and volume etc. Submit this letter prior to
applying for a building permit.
92. Pay all Capital Improvement TIF and Master Drainage Fees and Plan Check
fees (LEMC 16.34).
93. Provide a traffic signal warrant analysis for the intersection of Greenwald and
Scenic Crest Drive. If warranted, the developer shall construct a traffic signal
at the intersection of Greenwald and Scenic Crest Drive.
Prior to Occupancy
94. Pay all fees and meet requirements of an encroachment permit issued by the
Engineering Division for construction of off-site public works improvements
(LEMC12.08, Res.83-78). All fees and requirements for an encroachment
permit shall be fulfilled before Certificate of Occupancy.
r--
95. All compaction reports, grade certifications, monument certifications (with tie
notes delineated on 8 1/2" x 11" Mylar) shall be submitted to the Engineering
Division before final inspection of off-site improvements will be scheduled
and approved.
96. All public improvements shall be completed in accordance with the approved
plans to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
97. Water and sewer improvements shall be completed in accordance with Water
District requirements.
98. Pay all fair-share contribution for the cost of offsite improvements as
identified in this project's Traffic Study, dated October 24, 2005. The fair-
share cost shall be based on a cost estimate of the offsite improvements
provided by the developer and approved by the City Engineer.
99. If warranted, the traffic signal at Greenwald and Scenic Crest Drive shall be
operational.
~
Page ) 5 of ) 8
ACiENDA tT~ No.3
PAGE ~3 OF i Ih
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on APNs 340-240-034. -038. -072 and -075
...."
1 00. TUMF fees shall be paid subject to the Development Agreement and
Memorandums of Understanding in effect for the Ramsgate Specific Plan.
The TUMF fees shall be the effective rate at the time when the Certificate of
Occupancy is obtained.
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
101. Annex into CFD 2003-1: Prior to approval of the Final Map, Parcel Map,
Site Development Plan, or Special Use Permit (as applicable), the applicant
shall annex into Community Facilities District 2003-1 to offset the annual
negative fiscal impacts of the project on public safety operations and
maintenance issues in the City.
102. Annex into LLMD No.1: Prior to approval of the Final Map, Parcel
Map, Site Development Plan, or Special Use Permit (as applicable) the
applicant shall annex into Lighting and Landscape Maintenance District No.
I to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project on public right-...."
of-way landscaped areas to be maintained by the City, and for street lights in
the public right-of-way for which the City will pay for electricity and a
maintenance fee to Southern California Edison.
103. Fire Station Impact Fee and Other Impact Fees: Upon completion
of the Fire Station Impact Study and other impact fee studies, developer
shall pay impact fee.
104. CFD for Park. Parkway. Open Space and Storm Drain Maintenance:
Prior to approval of the Final Map, Parcel Map, Site Development Plan, or
Special Use Permit (as applicable), the applicant shall form a Mello-Roos
Community Facilities District to fund the on-going operation and
maintenance of the new parks, parkways, open space and public storm drains
constructed within the development and federal NPDES requirements to
offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project.
Page) 6 of ) 8
.....,
AOENDAI~ NO.~~
PAGE b~ ~
/'"'
CONDITIONS OF APFROV AL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on AFNs 340-240-034. -038, -072 and -075
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
105. The developer shall pay park fees of$I,600 per unit ($211,200).
106. The developer is required to participate in the "Public Facility" fee program.
107. The developer shall comply with all NPDES storm water requirements.
108 All interior landscape, recreation areas, facilities and/or open space shall be
maintained by the HOA. No park credits shall be given.
109 The HOA shall maintain all all park and common landscape areas.
110. The HOA shall maintain all natural and manufactured slopes.
~ 111. The HOA shall maintain all drainage facilities and structures.
112. The HOA shall maintain all catch basins, collectors, v-ditches or any other
related flood control or storm water control device.
113. The HOA to maintain all exterior walls and landscaping.
114. The developer shall participate in the City-wide LLMD.
115. The developer shall annex into LLMD District 1 for all exterior landscaping
to be maintained by the City.
116. The developer shall comply with all City ordinances regarding construction
debris removal and recycling, per Section 8.32 of the Lake Elsinore
Municipal Code.
117. The developer shall provide the City with an inventory of all street signs,
street markings, street trees and total square footage of all streets in a digital
format acceptable to the City.
~
Page 17 of 18
AG91~"~~;:~
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25475 REVISION NO.1
A subdivision of 37.3+ acres into 132 residential lots and eight (8) open space lots,
on APNs 340-240-034. -038. -072 and -075
~
118. Secondary access shall be clearly defined as part of the development.
119. The developer shall meet City curb, gutter and sidewalk requirements.
120. The City's Landscape Architect shall review all landscape and/or irrigation
plans prior to acceptance by the City.
(Riverside County Fire Department Conditions of Approval dated March 8, 2006
attached. )
(End of Conditions)
~
Page 18 of 18
~
ACENDA"", J'O._3
PACE~OF /) h
rlHK-U(j-C:UUO WW 11;jC: Hn KIV I.iV 1'1/'\.1: illtl: I'H^ !'iV. ~:)1 ~:):) q(j(jO
C6 - nt. Z~Y7f
03/08/06
05:5l.
".....-
1 :ary Conditions
Riverside County LMS
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
10. GENERAL CONDITIONS
FIRE DEPARTMENT
lO.PIRE.999
CASE - CITY CASE STATEMENT
With respect to the conditions of approval for the
referenced project, the Fire Department recommends the
following tire protection measures be provided in
accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or
recognized fire protection standards:
10.FlRE.999
MAP-#50-BLUE DOT REFLECTORS
Blue retroreflective pavement markers shall be mounted on
private streets, public streets and driveways to indicate
location of fire hydrants. Prior to installation, placement
of markers must be approved by the Riverside County Fire
Department.
~
lO.FIRE.999 MAP*-#16-HYDRANT/SPACING
Schedule 11 tire protection approved standard fire
hydrants, (6"x4"x2 1/2") located one at each street
intersection and spaced no more than ~() feet apart in
any ~re tion, Wit.h no portion of any lot frontage more
than feet tram a hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be
1000 GP for:2 hour duration at 20 PSI. Shall include
perimeter streets at each intersection and spaced 660 feet
apart.
50. PRIOR TO MAP RECORDATION
FIRE DEPARTMENT
50.FlRE.999
MAP~#7-ECS-HAZ FIRE AREA
EcS map must be stamped by the Riverside County Surveyor
with the following note: The lanq division is located in
the "Hazardous Fire Areall af Riverside County as shown on a
map on file with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors. Any
building constructed on lots created by this land division
shall comply with the special construction provisions
contained in Riverside County Ordinance 787.
~
r. U,j
Page: 1
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
ORAFT
AGENDA ITEM NO. , '3 J.1.L
PACE II! 1 Of
DHK-Utl-LUUO WtU 11;jL illl KIV VU rlKt r&t
rHX NU. ~bl ~bb 4tltlo
03/08/06
05:51
Riverside County LMS
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Library Conditions
50. PRIOR TO MAP RECORDATION
50.FlRE.999
MAP*-#43-ECS-ROOFING MATERIAL
EeG map must be stamped by the Riverside County Surveyor
with the following note: All buildings shall be
constructed with class "4" material as per the California
Building Coae.
50.FIRE.999
MAP-#D-04-ECS-FUEL MODIFICATION
P. U4
Page: 2
~
DRAFT
DRAFT
ECS map must be stamped by the Riverside County Surveyor
with the following note; ~rior to the issuance of a
grading permit, the developer shall prepare and submit to
the fire department for approval a fire
protection/vegetation management that hould include but not
limited to the following items: a) Fuel modification to
reduce fire loading. b) Appropriate fire breaks according
to fuel load, slope and terrain. c) Non flammable walls
along common boundaries between rear yards and open space.
d) Emergency vehicle access into open space areas shall be
provided at intervals not to exceed 1500'. e) A
homeowner'S association or appropriate district shall be
responsible for maintenance of all fire protection measures
wi thin the open apace areas. ......,
ANY HABITA~ CONSERVATION ISSUE AFFECTING THE FIRE
DEPARTMENT FUEL MODIFICATION REQUIREMENT, SHALL HAVE
CONCURRENCE WITH THE RES~ONSIBLE WILDLIFE AND/OR OTHER
CONSERVATION AGENCY.
50.FIRE.999
MAP-#46-WATER PLANS.
The applicant or developer shal~ furnish one copy of the
water system plans to the Fire Department for review.
Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer,
containing a Fire Department app~oval signature b~ock, and
shall conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and
minimum fire flow. Once plans are signed by the local water
company, the originals shall pe presented to the Fire
Department for signature.
50.FIRE.999
MAP-#53-ECS-WTR PRIOR/COMBUS
Ees map must be stamped by the Riverside County Surveyor
with the following note: The required water system,
including fire hydrants, shall be installed and accepted by
the appropriate water agenoy prior to any combustible
building material placed on an individual lot.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
PAGE M Of 11 b
DRAFT
DRAFT
......,
nHt{-ut~-~UUti Wt.U 11; j~ Hl1 t{ 1 V liU I' 1 t<t. t'&t.
rAX NU. ~bl 8bb 4~~o
P. Ub
03/08/06
05:51
r-- . .
I ~ary Cond~t1ons
Riverside County ~MS
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Page: 3
50. PRIOR TO MAP RECORDATION
50.FIRE.999
MAP-#4?-SECONDARY ACCESS
DRAFT
In the interest of Public Safety, the project shall provide
an Alternate Or Secondary Access(s) as stated in the
Transportation Peparment Conditions. Said Alternate or
Secondary Access(s) shall have concurrence and approval of
both the Transpor~~tjo~ pe~artment and the Riverside County
Fire Department. rOIL ItffllOo&IJ ~,4./7 ~1t)'&J Z"ltJ. O~
80. PRIOR TO SLDG PRMT ISSUANCE
FIRE DEPARTMENT
80.FIRE.999
MAP-#50C-TRACT WATER VERIFICA
DRAFT
The required water system, including all fire hydrant(s),
shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water
agency and the Riverside County Fire Department prior to
any combustible building material placed on an individual
lot. Contact the Riverside County Fire Department to
inspect the required fire flow, street signs, all weather
r-- surface, and all access and/or secondary. Approved water
plans must be a the job site.
80.FIRE.999
MAP - SECONDARY/ALTER ACCESS
DRAFT
In the interest of Public Safety, the project shall provide
An Alternate or Secondary Access(s) as stated in the
Transportation Department conditions. Said Alternate or
Secondary Access(s) shall have concurrence and approval of
both the T+anaportation Department and the Riverside County
Fire Department. Alternate and/or Secondary Access(s)
shall be completed and inspected per the approved plans.
,,--
AGENDA ITEM NO.3
PACE b1 OF Jl h
II IiJ\ I I Ii fi~i~!9 t;
e! I \.9 dl~ III I ;J- ~
i! I I II I 'I . .5: II I ~~~ J:
i31B '1 ~ll Iii -1& idil H 'I ~1~111 ~ .- ~;e
'I! ! ~t. ~ ~ il f II :i~ ~~I~~= MI. If!~. i i: ~ .~
11,lln:II'11 a:;! ~ I; : II I IISi!~ I ~C'I
i II I.' 11'1 ~ I ~~ II L i ~ III~l~ ai c5
III I nlh!! E~b i lillm~1 I ',r idh 1~lb ~~
..;" ....Sf:
I I I !
I I
It 1.11 I h
Ili,!dli iU
~! !Ih~ i I
" II
I -I
Itllli II!!
II -
.....,
~ [h!b!]
I t (.0
~ C>
III ~ C>
Iii II! ("'..J
~ l = 0
I !:I " I [h!b!] N
I I! ~I
I .. --J
I .' ~ ~
-:> t a
.[h!b!]
t Ii I~ .
~
i '
I I · .
,Iiil .~IIII
I I Ii .1 ii I III is. I ~~
I ~~~l!hlll !U
z
1 I I _I.. .a I a
!
. ~ ~
Ii it. ~--4l! .1 I~
.. f:.
III ~..
I
. ',~r:Jf ~'"T --"lr,r
. ~, \ ~,~jl,~: ,~~
-"1.: :~.1
'; ;it . ",
. -
~ i' ,
t ..... :_ \j
I
,., - - ~~,
r-== .~ ;
~~. .... .
~- :: --'
I~
i il
~R it
)( II fl
;d UI
III)
a!1 ail
nllil
n ~~I
z
~
a..
w
a..
()
rn
o
cc:
<
::c
~ I
a.. I
W i
~~ ~
~~ ~ I
~i~W8~1
~~il il~
...J fii .. iii 0 ":
lTPINO 3. ~lY~~; ~
~ IQC', .-:01' ~ \I, -.:. 11. I!' l=:5 ~bfi
~! Ii
f~ u
~i !
~i ~
i
E;(HiSrr
i~11111
i I I.il ..",
e II~IILI ~I
~ .111 I
...~........
~
r!IJIIII
f9~~~~S3
::~ ~~
I lit.. crll ,.. ...
...~ lit., "":"11I:
I .IlI.~ or , Ilf II
; lot ~ = "'~ 1I~
~ or I..
~ II I!Z
I z 1\ , Z ' : I
! % %
:
I.....=::....!l
-
1}
~
~
CO
=
c:>
c......J
'., ,', ,.~a.;".. .
''\:\'' ..~~,
= 0
[bfb!] e C""-l
/
,g =
[bfb!]
~
'~'.
~<~'\;\
<0
<?
-4
lib
~~.
~
~ vf?"
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
pAGE I 6b _OF
WJ
O:::z
00
z_
- (/)
U">_
-'>
WJ-
~~
""'z
-,-
z
'-'-z
0<:
~c:
<3
......,
"
i.
\.9
\)
\
.....
\-\ ~
cl
~
;~
;::--
:l
~
"#
/',
; U n
G:Ad
~
~R I' i ~ IU' I I i
~!II!! h!l~ :1111 III!!' u!~1 a I'
i uhBllllh ; LH ; JIll uhlll Ilhh
~ ~.
".......... ~ ~ ~ ..~
U! jlhlli" !! Ii!! illl<l I < Ii I
~~! illhlhml II I !!I I! n!l~lhilh t hili!
.. · -.e .
I a I
i ;d~l~ ~.1 jalll~~i ! ~ I !
!! ! ~~IM MUlbmlli~ihd
~~
~ ! lllllllll I 'I. !!II!I!I!lll!I!!
; i ihiilU ulUhlUmlli
~ 8
I fd ~
II 1 l ~ .!il
! Ithi 1:1. h~ "III g
.~ 191 J t I B
i Ihlllll'd ~
~ ~nfl ~)~ it I
! mil ili ~Il ~
~ ~
~~
z
w
Q.
<(
~ fj
~ ~
<(It:!:
~~~
"'~lL
-z
It...-
It'1tl;c'
&lg
- ;::
I"Z-
0:58
zQ.<(
z
:5
0-
W
0-
~
()
en
o
\9 Z
<;) :5
,
""'
\
~
z I
~
a. <;;
!
...10 ~~:mM W ~
~lu ,,:.~- 1-- N
w~ '"
~w :--:;~ -W
.JW CI)~ ~
zlll
OJ >-<l' ..r
~ z
~ a: CI) c( ~
r c(::e 0 ...
3 ZC(0)u10~~
a:,...,a: 1-",
--~ 0 -JOl;,
:Ew~~ ~g~
..J ~ =I: ..J o~...
CI) w ..
W w ::e w J: o~
a: a: ~ ~ ~~~
a. ~ :E~u
. i~
ij~l.r i I l~ I I ~ "',I "
t ;111.1 t li.1 t ,III 1,'1, ! I
i i L i i II ~~! ·
IIIPIIlli I! I 'I t- ill ~ ·
I ldi II Ilk II U. ~ ,~ i :
EI ~ Ell!
.
~~
z
rG=
I '
I'. II I II I' I~ I II ~~ ~
I lllhhllln I nil j IlL j lb. j.
~ ,...
1111111111111111111111\ ~ \11\ tI
o ~ () 0 0
z
::s
0..
w
0..
<(
U
if
C
::s
0
~
<(
~
~ ::>
0
u
~ -1
<(
U
~ a::
~
"
\1
,.~
r...:c,,-
f"""\,
~J!ce3
r::;~:,.,;;:a:_
t;,l;.:;':.'~
i
L..~
I,,?;/~"
,,:9'~'t~
tu
AGENDA'TB1 NO. 3
GE
~ I
0.. I
~ i
fij~ ~
~(I) a !
~~mar~.
:i-~il
:Jl!:!wcq ~
w rIJ =I: iiI 0 F.
.. lE~~~ i~1 I
/""'
N
~..~
i~
/""'
T
I
i f
,
/""'
~
..
ti.
o.
~.
N
E1
I
;
-I
,.
L..,f\. ~ ~ Ii
\ K I
.R-'.~
I.i j .
IN"
I
.;
1&1 .!l
~,;
o ~
<l
Z i
oC ...
-' ..
0. ~
k
"
~.-=4:!
irt
"'I"-
~\O lI'l. '0
8 !:=.
ri '3
~. g
.....
~
w
a:
o
z
(/) ~
Ww
~ ~
o ~
I
w
~ ~
m ~
II:
~1-
/'1.7
() AGENDA IlBt NO.
PAGE 101
~
i
.1
Ii
..
,i
.
i
.
;; III"
J,.. ,
r., \," "
~"'>:: "t .
I
......,
w ~
z -:
o .B
.
Q
Z :
ct <
...J ...
Q.. ~
'-'
~
:>:
~
h
i!
u<
i~
o
......,
"
t w
ll:
f ~ 0
c3 " Z
ii ~ (j) -
! w rn
~ ...J
..
. l.l W w
=
"
~ ~ w
J lo:
~ 0 ct
11 ...J
~ I
.!
~
......,
~~....,.,. I K '
; ~ ..~
c5<z 7
/"""'
...,
s
8~
J~
,
n
H
r--
/"""'
'E
t
8
I
I
:, ~~~
I~ i; 0
I d
_J_
~
\ I< I
~ t) ~""iJ
~~LJ;u i
j~
~8
~~
@
~
-1
'\
j~~
~ i" ~
'" '"
~"'I"-
~I"-~
l1. S
Ii; g
~
Ii:
I
I
l
I
o ~
~ i
I- ~
!
z <
oC oIlI
-' .
D.. e
'"
-i!
..
::II
~
~
~I
It
h
.
i
.
w
rc
o
z
-
(/)1/)
..J
WW
~~
O~
I
w
~ l-
I/)
31m ~.
$-.n ~1-3
AOEN:;j rL"-Of y;;-:
!l"""'"" ,~
I,""" '("
/....,...
an!'!'~
" fl'''J::. ~ .
'1\
~ ~
(/)
m w
~
I "j ~ ::
<t
--:. AOE"~A'tEMNO. . ~
PAGEJ I 5...l.Lb--
<
o
i '
~ g
& i
.
.!
~
w
a:
0
z
(f) -
(/)
W ..J
W
~ ~ w
0 :Il:
fl o ~
I
~
j
.
"
Ui
~
.
"
~
"
.
o
>
.
!'
~
~
z
r
if07
I
....",
ci
o .5
3t ]
I- -E
~
z ..
c( ...
..J
Q. f
"
~
.
..
~
i
.1
i,
;~
'..,
....",
5~~
N;'~'-_-,:' ll.", ....
!;l i:.>I:r4 ~
8-'"
Ii ~
~- J ~. g
t 0
~
/"'""'
~
5~ ~
~.
~ ~.~ :1
i'
f .t
.r3'~ ~ i.
~'~ .
~ i
.
Ii:
I
/"'""'
I
t
w g
w -:
II: !
J: ~
I- g
, 3
%
"" 4
..J =
o
Q. h
, '"
...
h
.
::ol
,r-,
~
..,
, ; ~
O~
g-
'E
~
::J
o
U
,
I
I
I
I
Ln~_
~
Ih
8,.
j;;
UJ
II:
o
Z
CJ) ;;;
W ..I
UJ
~ UJ
~
0":
..I
I
I
I
---~
~ ~
" (1)
m UJ
~ ~
ACENDA ITEM NO. ..3
PAGE 113 Of
I
lIh t
~=~\ ~..~~ r [; ~ r~
t. ," -'''., '., """~..,, ".', ," ,,'\ ~,'
b_~'\;.a ,._~ ~_g a; G
\K I 6"" ~ I
a.. : MI.,., .....-7'
.~
'l'. ,q rfCRlli ~
E'\O' "'"'' "i"-"iJ a
;~~/~ h t ~ ~ .
\k
,
I
I i
c=
&;1J1
JC:
I '-'
ci
w .9
w .;
a: ~
J: 'S
I- ~
""
z ..
<( .
...J .
e
Q. "
~
~
:>!
~
~
ii
"
~i
;~
;-
.
f
"
-..,.,
w
a:
o
z
(j) en
W ~
~ ~
o ~
I
-..,.,
~
~
.~
lI""""'''-L'n1 'ft BO .ll~
.,~ ~;'Z f:r.~'~ ~ ,"~'}"~ i~
t""J\.t\ c ~Ja I
\ K'
~
~
z
~
CIl
W ~
~ :
o ~
I ~
~ ~ENDA '.TEM NO...2..-
~:: PAGEIJS__fiF..JJJz.-
f i
~ff I. f J ~f ~
~~'it! htlJ~ ~tfi i r
~ uhBlul1 : Lu a Ilhh
ill illllllllill! 11111 :! ,Ilhl
.. . ~
31\1~O V
q~'il3 ~ I J f ~ I ~! I Ii i a
l ~i8 R~ "1< ~I ~ I'i ~ ~ II Iqt i. '
~! ! ~n UiiUli!hUhMIIMhll ~ lihi !;I ~
'i llllll' II !LII!ill~!lII!I'1 - { !llll ~ ii! ,~ ~
~ : illilll !!mlllllnMlb: In III III ... -
lb!hfl
~
~ i
i.1 !
lISI <Ii
~ 'I
-I~! !
UJ
0=2
00
2_
- (/)
(/) -
-':>
UJ-
UJCl
=0
:5~
.......2
02:
<t:
>- -'
r- a..
i3
.
~
~ ~
~ .
~
:I:
@~
z
~
.... ,
~
r~
kX".-=ra
C'O
L,~~.;~
:..:c;'h:.X:J
li-..
'..~
'"
~ uJ
.......
C(:
Q
N
I ~
~ I
...J
W ~
8m ~
~~ ~
>-CJ ..r
a: Cf.) < !
c(~ ~ci ~
- -: Z a: 0) a: I- ~t
--t;: O....lI!
3 ~WIO~ ~g~
...J t- C\I ...J i~
~NO - Cf.)~w 0 ..
ACiENDAe . OF lI0_~~~~~ ~
PAG - Q. t- t-:J ~~8
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
~
TO:
CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
FROM:
ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DA TE:
AUGUST 1,2006
PREPARED BY:
LINDA MILLER, PROJECT PLANNER
PROJECT TITLE:
MITIGA TED NEGA TIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-
12, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03,
PRE-ZONING NO. 2006-04 AND ANNEXATION NO.
77 FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED ADJACENT TO
STATE ROUTE 74, EASTERLY OF TRELLIS LANE
AND THE RAMSGA TE (CENTEX) SPECIFIC PLAN
APPLICANT:
THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, 130 SOUTH MAIN
STREET, LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA 92562
r---
PROJECT REQUESTS
. Mitigated Negative Declaration No 2005-12. The City of Lake Elsinore
intends to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (~D) for annexation
purposes only pursuant to Article 6 (Negative Declaration Process) and
Section 15Q70 (Decision to Prepare a Negative or Mitigated Negative
Declaration) as established by the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA).
,...--.
. General Plan Amendment No. 2006-03. The City of Lake Elsinore is
initiating an amendment to the City's Sphere of Influence (SOl) and General
Plan Land Use Map designations by changing the land use designations of
the subject property consisting of approximately one hundred fifty-four (154)
acres. The review and analysis ofthis General Plan Land Use Amendment is
pursuant to Government Code Section(s) 65350 through 65362, the Lake
Elsinore General Plan and Chapter 17.92 (Hearings) of the Lake Elsinore
Municipal Code (LEMC).
ACENDA 'TEU NO. ~
PACE.. \ OF _ 33
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1, 2006 ~
PAGE 2 OF 13
PROJECT TITLE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-
12, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03,
PRE-ZONING NO. 2006-04 AND ANNEXATION NO.
77
· Pre-Zoning No. 2006-04. Conforming and consistent to the proposed
amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map, the City of Lake Elsinore is
also initiating an application to change the Zoning (Pre-Zoning) of the
subject project area from the County of Riverside's zoning designations to
the City of Lake Elsinore's Pre-Zoning designations. The review and
analysis of the requested Pre-Zoning is pursuant to Government Code
Section(s) 65350 through 65362 and Chapter 17.92 (Hearings) & Chapter
17.84 (Amendments) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC).
· Annexation No. 77. The City of Lake Elsinore is proposing an annexation of
approximately one hundred fifty-four (154) acres from the County of
Riverside's jurisdiction but within the Sphere ofInfluence area of the City of
Lake Elsinore. The annexation has been initiated by the City of Lake '-"
Elsinore pursuant to the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government
Reorganization Act of2000 (Government Code Section 56000-56001) and
the standards, policies and directives of the Riverside Local Agency
Formation Commission (LAFCO).
PROJECT LOCATION
The one hundred fifty-four (154) acre, irregularly shaped, Annexation area is located
adjacent to State Route 74 (SR-74). Forty (40) parcels are located south ofSR 74 and
four (4) parcels are located north ofSR-74. Trellis Lane creates the western boundary.
The southerly property line "zigzags" along the boundary of the neighboring Centex
development currently under construction and within the City of Lake Elsinore's City
Limits. The eastern boundary is just past the residential lots fronting Missouri Drive.
The central access road is Riverside Street. The existing County of Riverside General
Plan Designation is Very Low Density (VLD) and Commercial Retail (CR), and the
Zoning Designations are R-A-20,000 (Residential Agriculture) and C-P-S (Scenic
Highway Commercial).
~
AGENDA ITEM 4:
PAGE~OF~
,,-
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
PAGE 3 OF 13
PROJECT TITLE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-
12, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03,
PRE-ZONING NO. 2006-04 AND ANNEXATION NO.
77
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
,,-
ResidentialN acant/Commercial
ResidentialN acant
South ResidentialN acant
Future SP Area 'F'
& Ramsgate
S ecific Plan Ci
Ramsgate Specific
Plan Ci )
Ramsgate Specific
Plan Ci
East ResidentialN acant
West ResidentialN acant
BACKGROUND
The land area of Annexation No. 77 is known as one of two "pocket" areas created by
the approval of the City of Lake Elsinore's Annexation for North Peak. The North
Peak Annexation was approved in 1992 pursuant to LAFCO Annexation No. 1991-43-
1, 5. At that time LAFCO approved the annexation with the understanding that the
pocket area annexations would follow the North Peak Annexation. The first of the
pocket area annexations was brought before LAFCO for approval on October 27,
2005. This Annexation is known as LAFCO Annexation 2005-50-1 (City Annexation
No. 71- Merritt Luster). LAFCO has conditioned final approval of Annexation No. 71
(Merritt Luster) on the submittal of City of Lake Elsinore's Annexation No. 77 to
LAFCO.
,--.
AGENDAATEM 4
PAGE 2 OF 3:')
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
PAGE 4 OF 13
PROJECT TITLE: MITIGA TED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-
12, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03,
PRE-ZONING NO. 2006-04 AND ANNEXATION NO.
77
....,
LAFCO suggests that Cities hold Public Meetings prior to processing annexations to
provide an opportunity for residences to comment and ask questions concerning the
annexation proposal. Staff held a Public "Outreach" Meeting on May 17, 2006 for that
purpose. Approximately 50 to 70 residences attended the meeting. The majority ofthe
questions were focused on the existing neighboring Centex Home development. Other
questions related to possible costs that could be assessed to the existing residences if
the Annexation were approved. Staff explained at the meeting that the only increase in
costs to the property owners associated to the Annexation would be a Street Lighting
and Maintenance District fee of$24.90 per year per home or $29.88 per acre for vacant
land. All questions were answered in a City letter sent to residents on June 19,2006.
This letter is attached as an exhibit of this report.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION(S}
~.
The proposed annexation consists of one hundred fifty-four (154) acres that has been
previously subdivided into forty-five (45) parcels. Of the forty-five (45) parcels,
twenty-six (26) are occupied with rural type residential uses and a few commercial
uses, while the remaining nineteen (19) parcels are vacant. The parcels are owned by
many individual land owners. The land area ranges from relatively flat areas to hills
consisting of natural vegetation and substantial rock outcroppings.
The area is under the jurisdiction of the County of Riverside but within the City of
Lake Elsinore's Sphere of Influence (SOl) area. The Annexation process requires that
the City of Lake Elsinore approve a General Plan Amendment and Pre-Zoning
designations in order to establish a regulatory procedure for future development. This
process will concurrently remove the area from the City's Sphere of Influence and
place the area within the City of Lake Elsinore's city boundary.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03
The City of Lake Elsinore is initiating this amendment to the General Plan Land Use
Map as part of the Annexation process. Annexation will allow the City to change the ....,
AGENDA ITEM ~
PAGE 4. OF 33
~
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
PAGE 5 OF 13
PROJECT TITLE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-
12, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03,
PRE-ZONING NO. 2006-04 AND ANNEXATION NO.
77
existing County of Riverside's General Plan Designation's of Very Low Density
(1 dwelling unit/.5 acre) and Commercial Retail (FAR =.3) to City of Lake Elsinore's
General Plan Land Use Designation of V ery Low Density (1 dwelling unit/2acres) for
the four (4) parcels identified as Assessor Parcel Numbers (APN's) 374-110-071,347-
110-074, 347-110-075 and 349-400-034, Low-Medium Density (6 dwelling units/acre)
on forty (40) parcels and Medium High Density (18 dwelling units/acre) and Low-
Medium Density (6 dwelling units/acre) on one (1) parcel (APN 347-H*>-003).
. I 10 - 003
Staff has concluded that with single family residential uses approaching on two sides
ofthis project area, a continuation of the Low-Medium Density residential designation
would be acceptable. The Very Low Density designation was proposed on the northern
side of State Route 74 since the land area begins to rise, creating rolling hills from
State Route 74 which could restrict residential development to more rural type uses.
",.....
PRE-ZONING NO. 2006-04
Prior to the annexation of the land area, the City Council is required to adopt a Pre-
Zoning ordinance to delineate the zoning that will apply to the property to be annexed
to the City (Government Code Section 56375 (a). Corresponding and consistent with
the proposed General Plan Amendment (referenced above), the City of Lake Elsinore
is also initiating changes from the County of Riverside's Zoning designations ofC-P-S
(Scenic Highway Commercial) on APN 347-100-003 and R-A-20,000 (Residential
Agriculture) on the remaining parcels to R-3 (High Density Residential District) and
R-l (Single Family Residential District) on APN 347-100-003, RR (Rural Residential
District) on APN's 374-110-071,347-110-074,347-110-075 and 349-400-034, and the
remaining parcels to R-l (Single Family Residential District). The proposed Pre-
Zoning designations are pursuant to the regulations governing all applicable chapters
of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC).
~
AGENDA ITEM ~
PAGE ~ OF 33
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
PAGE 6 OF 13
PROJECT TITLE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-
12, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03,
PRE-ZONING NO. 2006-04 AND ANNEXATION NO.
77
.....,
ANNEXATION NO. 77
The Annexation is being initiated by the City of Lake Elsinore pursuant to the directive
of LAFCO. As mentioned, the North Peak Annexation approved in 1992 was
approved with the understanding that at a future time the City would annex the two (2)
"pocket" areas created by the North Peak Annexation. The larger of the "pockets" is
the current Annexation, Annexation No. 77. The second "pocket" is Annexation No.
71 (Merritt Luster/Centex - City Council approval December 14, 2004). Since
residential development slowed shortly after the LAFCO directive and the developers
of the North Peak project experienced financial difficulties, the processing of the
"pocket" annexations were postponed. Now, due to the recent surge in residential
development including the adjacent single family development known as Ramsgate,
this directive has become a priority. Approval of the Annexation will comply with the
LAFCO requests to "close" the "pocket" created by the previously approved and
conditionally approved annexations.
.....,
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-12
As defined by Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines, an Initial Study was prepared in order to provide the City with information
necessary in determining whether an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative
Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration would be the appropriate necessary
environmental documentation and clearance for the subject project contained herein.
According to section 15 070(b ) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQ A) a
Mitigated Negative Declaration was appropriate since it deemed that although the
proposal for the Annexation, General Plan Amendment, and Pre-Zoning of the one
hundred fifty-four (154) acres could result in significant effects, mitigation measures
were available reducing these significant effects to insignificant levels.
The Initial Study, Mitigation Monitoring Plan and Notice of Intent to Adopt a
Mitigated Negative Declaration was circulated to the State Clearinghouse for the
required thirty (30) day public and agency review period. The thirty (30) day review ""'"
AGENDA ITEM 4-
PAGE~OFB
r-
r-
~
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006
PAGE 7 OF 13
PROJECT TITLE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-
12, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03,
PRE-ZONING NO. 2006-04 AND ANNEXATION NO.
77
period ended on June 3, 2006. No comments were received. The documents were
revised to accommodate a request by the owner of APN 347-100-003 to designate his
property to Medium High Density with a Pre-zoning of (High Density Residential
District) instead of the originally planned General Plan Designation of Low Medium
Density with a Pre-Zoning designation ofR-3 (High Density Residential). A narrow
strip ofland will be designated Low Medium Density with a Pre-Zoning ofR-l (Single
Family Residential District), consistent with the properties adjacent and across from
this narrow strip. The environmental consultant found that this change did not
constitute recalculating the documents.
ANAL YSIS
This proposal is limited to the action of Pre-Zoning the property and amending the
City's Sphere of Influence and General Plan to incorporate the site into the City's
boundaries. Pre-Zoning the property establishes a regulatory procedure that must be
followed for future development to occur, subject to future City of Lake Elsinore
approvals and environmental review. Therefore, Pre-Zoning the property does not
permit development of the property.
The State of California Government Code Section 56653 requires that an applicant for
annexations of parcels into the City of Lake Elsinore include a "Plan of Services"
report as a critical element of the annexation process. As required, the Plan of Services
Report (see attachment) provides a comprehensive evaluation of the existing municipal
services to the Project, as well as an evaluation offuture services upon annexation. The
report enumerates and describes the services to be provided, the levels of service
(LOS) and range of those services, the feasibility of extending such services, any
upgrades or additional facilities required by the City, and a description of when
services will commence. The report found that none to minimum municipal service
impacts would occur due to the annexation of the area.
AGENDA ITEM ~
PAGE ::L OF J:3
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1,2006 ,...."
PAGE 8 OF 13
PROJECT TITLE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-
12, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-03,
PRE-ZONING NO. 2006-04 AND ANNEXATION NO.
77
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2005-12 has been prepared pursuant
to Article 6 (Negative Declaration Process) and Section 15070 (Decision to Prepare a
Negative or Mitigated Negative Declaration) of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA). Based on staffs evaluation, the proposed project will not result in any
significant effect on the environment. Further, pursuant to Section 15073 (Public
Review of a Proposed Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration) ofthe
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the intended Mitigated Negative
Declaration was submitted to the State Clearinghouse on May 1, 2006 for the required
30 day review period, which ended on June 1, 2006. No comments have been
received.
......."
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the following Resolutions:
Resolution No. 2006-_, recommending City Council adoption of Mitigated
Negative Declaration No. 2005-12; Resolution No. 2006-_ recommending to the
City Council approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2006-03, Resolution No.
2006-_ recommending to the City Council approval of Pre-Zoning No. 2006-04, and
Resolution No. 2006-_ recommending to the City Council approval to commence
with proceedings for the properties described in Annexation No. 77. Approval is based
on the following Findings, Exhibits, and attached Conditions of Approval.
FINDINGS - MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-12
1. Revision in the project plans or proposal made by or agreed to by the applicant
before a proposed mitigated negative declaration and initial study are released
for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where
clearly no significant effects would occur.
,...."
AGENDA ITEM Ji
PAGE~OFTI