city council workshop multiple species habitat conservation plan (mshcp) december 20, 2011
Post on 11-Jan-2016
216 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP
MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP)
DECEMBER 20, 2011
Workshop Overview
City Council Workshop – No Action Taken MSHCP Historical Overview
Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) History Conservation Before and After
Endangered Species Acts (ESA) vs. MSHCP Transportation Link
Murrieta MSHCP Participation2
Murrieta Pros and Cons
3
MSHCP – Murrieta Pros and Cons
Pros Streamlined the process for individual property
owners, developer, and the City for public projects Certainty for development projects Project review with the plan as opposed to direct
consultation with the Wildlife Agencies Project review under CEQA relies on the MSHCP
Streamlined process for individual single-family homes
Provides more local control on the development process
General Plan 2035 uses MSHCP EIR 4
MSHCP – Murrieta Pros and Cons
Pros (continued) More efficient and user friendly process Coverage under the Endangered Species Acts 10(a)(1)(b) Incidental Take Permit
Murrieta has endangered species and habitat
5
MSHCP – Murrieta Pros and Cons
Cons Murrieta has more areas identified for
conservation than many cities, due to Occupation of endangered species Suitable habitat for endangered species Mitigation resolved before land use approval
Added mitigation fee for land development Linked to Measure “A” Funding City is now participant in the process and
before we were not6
MSHCP - Conservation
Conservation Acreage Comparison
7
Western Riverside County Plan Acreage
City of MurrietaAcreage
Land needed for Reserve 153,000 acres 2,390 acres*
Land Currently in Reserve 44,000 acres 670 acres
* Midpoint range of 1,580 to 3,200
Projects Under the MSHCP
8
MSHCP – Murrieta Development Projects
Work together withowners and Work together withowners and developers and balance the MSHCP with developers and balance the MSHCP with individual project proposalsindividual project proposals
Joint Project Review’s (JPR) Completed – Joint Project Review’s (JPR) Completed – 4444
9
MSHCP – Infrastructure Benefits
Murrieta Project Specific Examples Jackson Avenue Bridge Project Jackson Avenue Bridge Project Temporary Fire Station No. 5Temporary Fire Station No. 5 Guava Street BridgeGuava Street Bridge Meadowlark/Whitewood Phase 1Meadowlark/Whitewood Phase 1
10
MSHCP – Infrastructure Benefits
Developer Project Specific Examples Murrieta 18 Office ProjectMurrieta 18 Office Project Murrieta Market PlaceMurrieta Market Place Loma Linda University Medical Center – 4 ac Loma Linda University Medical Center – 4 ac
Parking Jefferson Business CenterParking Jefferson Business Center Ivy House ProjectIvy House Project
11
MSHCP – Single-Family Homes
Existing Single-family homes are in the Plan Existing Single-family homes are in the Plan AreaArea Must comply with Zoning requirementsMust comply with Zoning requirements
Individual New Single-family homes can be Individual New Single-family homes can be built on a lotbuilt on a lot Expedited Review Process working with City staffExpedited Review Process working with City staff
Improvement over prior process of working directly Improvement over prior process of working directly with the Federal and State Wildlife Agencieswith the Federal and State Wildlife Agencies
12
Withdrawal Considerations
13
MSHCP – Potential Impact of Withdrawal
Potential impacts to the County and other cities and participating Agencies Threat of the Wildlife Agencies pulling the
Permit or parts of the Permit if Murrieta pulls out City would be subject to the Endangered
Species Acts Single-family homes would be subject to the
Endangered Species Acts and small property owners would need go through the same process as developers
14
MSHCP – Potential Impact of Withdrawal
Development project and single-family home applications would return to the prior process Property owner and developer direct
consultation with Wildlife Agencies City have no involvement in the process
No CEQA coverage under MSHCP General Plan EIR for Biology would need to be redone Project by project review of infrastructure
projects Circulation Element streets and ESA permits, as needed 15
MSHCP – Potential Impact of Withdrawal
Project Specific Impacts Public infrastructure projects also would no Public infrastructure projects also would no
longer benefit from “take” authorization longer benefit from “take” authorization (endangered species) or Plan coverage to (endangered species) or Plan coverage to allow developmentallow development EIR may be required for key infrastructure projectsEIR may be required for key infrastructure projects
16
Future Projects Processed Under the ESA
North Murrieta Technology CorridorNorth Murrieta Technology Corridor North of Hospital (land not within Golden North of Hospital (land not within Golden
City or Murrieta Highlands SP)City or Murrieta Highlands SP) Along east City boundary (north of Clinton Along east City boundary (north of Clinton
Keith Road)Keith Road) Baxter Road extension eastBaxter Road extension east Keller Road Interchange (south side)Keller Road Interchange (south side) Keller Road extension eastKeller Road extension east New AntelopeNew Antelope
17
Future Projects Processed Under the ESA
South Murrieta Business CorridorSouth Murrieta Business Corridor Adams Avenue street improvementsAdams Avenue street improvements
Madison Avenue at Warm Springs CreekMadison Avenue at Warm Springs Creek
Other ProjectsOther Projects Murrieta Creek ProjectMurrieta Creek Project
Casa del Oso Oro bridge wideningCasa del Oso Oro bridge widening
Central Murrieta Plans and Infrastructure Central Murrieta Plans and Infrastructure
18
Next Steps
Prepare MSHCP Implementation Program
19
City Council Discussion
20
21
MSHCP – Murrieta Development Projects
JPR Breakdown (44 total)JPR Breakdown (44 total) 3 Meet and Confer3 Meet and Confer
0 Ad Hoc Committee with RCA Board0 Ad Hoc Committee with RCA Board
11 Commercial development11 Commercial development
14 Residential Subdivision14 Residential Subdivision
3 Commercial Industrial Subdivisions3 Commercial Industrial Subdivisions
2 Withdrawn2 Withdrawn
1 No HANS application submitted to process1 No HANS application submitted to process
22
Recommendation
23
MSHCP - History
MSHCP Streamline Endangered Species Act (ESA)
compliance Protect threatened and endangered species and
their habitat (assembling wildlife reserve areas) Return local control to County and cities Provide certainty to developers project processes Provide certainty for infrastructure construction Provide habitat and open space for the future
24
MSHCP - Conservation
Conservation Intent Conserve focus species and their habitats Conserve large habitat blocks and diversity Keep reserves contiguous and connected Protect reserves – encroachment and non-
native species
25
top related