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