Coachella Valley MSHCP

Transcription

1 Coachella Valley MSHCP How Could It Affect You And Your Development Plans April 18, 2006 Presented by John C. Condas & Paul S. Weiland Nossaman Guthner Knox & Elliott LLP Phone (949) Fax (949) NOSSAMAN.COM Copyright, 2006 Nossaman Guthner Knox & Elliott LLP. All Rights Reserved. The information contained herein does not constitute a legal opinion and should not be relied upon by the reader as legal advice or be regarded as a substitute for legal advice.

2 Coachella Valley MSHCP?

3 Outline Habitat Conservation Planning under the Endangered Species Act Draft Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CV MSHCP) Overview Conservation Strategy Implementation Process Status Comparison to Western Riverside MSHCP 3

4 Endangered Species Act Major Regulatory Provisions Listing of species and designation of critical habitat Take prohibition Consultation process for federal actions Habitat Conservation Planning process for non-federal actions 4

5 Habitat Conservation Planning In 1982, Congress amended the ESA to include a process whereby non-federal entities could seek authorization for the incidental take of listed species Applicant prepares Habitat Conservation Plan There is no timetable for process Fish and Wildlife Service issues Incidental Take Permit Vary in scope and complexity from large-scale, multiple species HCPs to small-scale, single species HCPs 5

6 CV MSHCP: Overview Covers 1.2 million acres, 27 species, and 27 natural communities Provides take coverage under both federal and state law Permit holders include Riverside County and cities in the Plan Area 6

7 CV MSHCP: Conservation Strategy Assembly of MSHCP Reserve from land within 21 Conservation Areas Conservation objectives and required measures for each Conservation Area (section 4.3) 7

8 Whitewater Floodplain CA Sample conservation objectives: Conserve 4140 acres in total Conserve 2671 acres of core habitat for Coachella Valley milkvetch Conserve occupied burrowing owl burrows Maintain ability of wildlife to cross Indian Avenue and Gene Autry Trail by providing undercrossings Sample required measures: Local Permittee must ensure that fluvial and aeolian sand transport capacity are not reduced when Gene Autry Trail and Indian Avenue are widened CVWD must deposit sand removed from the groundwater recharge basins during O&M in the fluvial and aeolian sand transport area 8

9 CV MSHCP: Conservation Strategy Species specific avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures (section 4.4) Land use adjacency guidelines (section 4.5) 9

10 A, M & M Measures Avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures: Apply within one or more Conservation Areas Required surveys must be conducted consistent with accepted protocols Survey results must be submitted to Permittee (City or County) and Implementing Entity (CVCC) but not Wildlife agencies Measures specified for: Biological corridors Burrowing owls Covered riparian bird species Crissal thrasher Desert tortoise Fluvial sand transport Le Conte s thrasher Mesquite hummocks and mesquite bosque natural communities Peninsular bighorn sheep habitat Triple-ribbed mlikvetch 10

11 Land Use Adjacency Guidelines MSHCP defines adjacent as sharing a common boundary with any parcel in a CA. Local Permittees have some discretion to determine when the Guidelines are applicable. Guidelines exist for: Drainage Toxics Lighting Noise Invasives 11

12 CV MSHCP: Implementation Imposed on applicants for discretionary local permits through: Joint Project Review (JPR) process for any project within a Conservation Area Habitat Evaluation and Acquisition Negotiation Strategy (HANS) process for projects in portions of Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area Additional avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures based on site characteristics (using approved Biologist) Land use adjacency guidelines Mitigation fee (currently $5,270/acre) 12

13 CV MSHCP: JPR and HANS JPR is triggered by receipt of application for discretionary permit JPR serves to ensure Plan implementation Where HANS applies, JPR and HANS occur in conjunction with one another HANS serves to determine if the subject property is necessary for inclusion in the Reserve System 13

14 CV MSHCP: JPR Processing Step 1. Local Permittee transmits application to CVCC within 30 days (or applicant can request pre-application review directly form CVCC) Step 2. CVCC provides comments within 30 days of receipt or 14 days of an initial project review meeting, if held Step 3. Wildlife agencies provide comments within 30 days Step 4. If CVCC and/or Wildlife agencies identify concerns, meet and confer within 30 days with additional meetings if necessary 14

15 CV MSHCP: Status EIR Certified by CVAG as Lead Agency on February 6 and NOD Posted on February 7 Indio City Council voted to Oppose the existing MSHCP on February 15 Cathedral City voted to Oppose the existing MSHCP on February 22 CVAG entered into tolling agreements with more then 10 parties on March 9 to avoid legal challenges to the MSHCP; the agreements expire on June 7 Cities have until June 1 to Adopt MSHCP 15

16 Comparison of MSHCPs Plan Area Coachella Valley 1.2 million acres Western Riverside 1.26 million acres Covered Species 27 species 146 species Conservation Strategy Objectives and measures Cell criteria 16

17 Comparison Implementation similarities: Local land use authority is lead implementing agency Primary implementation mechanisms are JPR and HANS Implementing Entity and Wildlife agencies participate in JPR 17

18 Comparison Implementation differences: Requirements other than fee payment limited to Conservation Areas in CV MSHCP, not in Western Riverside MSHCP Riparian/riverine separately regulated in Western Riverside MSHCP, not CV MSHCP Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP) for impacts to identified species and riparian/riverine areas included in Western Riverside MSHCP, not CV MSHCP Approved Biologist prerequisite in CV MSHCP, not Western Riverside MSHCP 18

19 Comparison of IAs Coachella Valley Western Riverside Section 7 Consultations Subsequent Consultations will be consistent with MSHCP Consultation to the maximum extent allowable Critical Habitat Designation for Covered Species Lands within MSHCP Plan Area will not be designated to the maximum extent allowable for Covered Species Lands within MSHCP Plan Area will not be designated to the maximum extent allowable for Covered Species Adequately Conserved CEQA Permit Revocation or Suspension Except as required by law, CDFG will not recommend or seek to impose mitigation for impacts to Covered Species via CEQA Wildlife agencies have right to revoke or suspend all or portions of the Permits for a number of reasons including because a Permittee fails to ensure MSHCP implementation or approves a project that significantly compromises the viability of the MSHCP Reserve System 19

20 Contact John C. Condas and Paul S. Weiland Nossaman Guthner Knox & Elliott LLP Von Karman Ave., Suite 1800 Irvine, CA Phone (949) Fax (949) NOSSAMAN.COM