Planning Commission Meeting
Regular MeetingEscondido, CA · May 26, 2015
Minutes
Agenda Item No.: D
CITY OF ESCONDIDO
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
ESCONDIDO PLANNING COMMISSION
May 26,2015
The meeting of the Escondido Planning Commission was called to order at
7:00 p.m. by Chairman Weber in the City Council Chambers, 201 North Broadway,
Escondido, California.
Commissioners present: Jeffery Weber, Chairman; Bob McQuead, Vice-
chairman; Ed Hale, Commissioner; Gregory Johns, Commissioner; Don Romo,
Commissioner; James Spann, Commissioner; and Guy Winton Ill, Commissioner.
Commissioners absent: None.
Staff present: Bill Martin, Deputy Planning Director; Jay Paul, Associate Planner;
Owen Tunnel!, Principal Engineer; Adam Phillips, Deputy City Attorney; and Ty
Paulson, Minutes Clerk.
MINUTES:
Moved by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Vice-chairman McQuead, to
approve the minutes of the March 24, 2015, meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
(7-0)
ELECTION OF CHAIR & VICE-CHAIR:
Commissioner Hale nominated Commissioner Weber for Chair. With no other
nominations Commissioner Weber was elected to Chair by a vote of 6-0-1 (Weber
abstained).
Commissioner Spann nominated Commissioner McQuead to Vice-chair. With no
other nominations Commissioner McQuead was elected to Vice-chair by a vote of
6-0-1 (McQuead abstained).
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS — None.
FUTURE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS — None.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS — None.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. MASTER AND PRECISE DEVELOMENT PLAN AND ZONE CHANGE —
PHG 14-0020 and ENV 15-0004:
REQUEST: A Master and Precise Development Plan for a proposed mixed-use
development consisting of a 54-unit affordable multi-family residential apartment
project for military veterans and their families; on-site administration office,
business center, club house and other support spaces for the residents; and a
small commercial component to support training opportunities offered at the
facility. The residential component includes the construction of 48 new
apartment units and preservation of six existing adobe apartment units. The 48
new units would be situated in two, three-story buildings and include 11 one-
bedroom units, 32 two-bedroom units and 5 three-bedroom units. The
commercial component includes a small retail ground floor space (approx. 1,500
SF). A Zone Change to Planned Development-Mixed Use (PD-MU) is proposed
to facilitate development of the project. The project would provide 84 parking
spaces consisting of tuck under garage spaces (two-car tandem spaces) and
uncovered open spaces. The project is requesting to use the reduced parking
ratios and reduce the number of covered spaces as allowed for affordable
projects in conformance with the City's Density Bonus and Residential Incentives
Ordinance (Article 67, Escondido Zoning Code).
The project site is developed with historic adobe commercial and multi-family
residential structures and some of these structures will be retained and
incorporated into the project. Project implementation would include demolition of
the four-unit apartment building and arched uncovered porch entry feature;
carport; workshop/storage building; and portions of the adobe walls including the
8-foot-high wall along S. Escondido Boulevard. The pool and other landscape
features also would be removed.
PROPERTY LOCATION: The approximately 1.8-acre project site is comprised of
four parcels, addressed as 1556 S. Escondido Boulevard (APNs 236-460-04, -
05, -09 and -59).
Jay Paul, Associate Planner, referenced the staff report and noted staff issues
were whether the design of the proposed project would be consistent with the
General Plan Goals for the South Escondido Boulevard/Felicita Target Area and
South Escondido Boulevard Objectives and Design Guidelines for mixed-use
residential development, and the appropriateness of the demolition of historic
adobe structures. Staff recommended the Commission approve the proposed
Master and Precise Development Plan and Zone Change, provide design input
and any design recommendations on the architecture and colors of the new
three-story buildings, especially the rear elevation of buildings 1 and 2, and
2 of 9
perimeter wall materials, and adopt the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration
based on the following: 1) The proposed planned residential development would
be in conformance with the General Plan which allowed for mixed-use residential
development within the target area of the South Escondido Boulevard Area Plan
known as the "South Escondido Boulevard/Felicita Area" (page 11-70). The
project included a minimum density of 30 du/ac as required in the Target Area,
and also would provide a commercial component that also would serve the
residents as part of the services offered by VVSD. The project would be in
conformance with the South Escondido Boulevard Neighborhood Plan Objectives
and Design Guidelines that strive to provide opportunities for a balanced mix of
housing types, and to revitalize and renew the commercial area. The project
would provide additional affordable housing and support services to veterans and
their families; 2) The new, three-story apartment buildings would utilize an
architectural design that would be compatible with the existing adobe structures
and incorporates similar features to provide an appropriate transition between
buildings. Adequate on-site parking and circulation would be provided to support
the various components/features of the project, and appropriate open space
amenities and services would be provided to serve the residents. The project
would include a variety of amenities such as common open space and gathering
areas; individual patios for selected units and common balconies; enhanced
walkways and paving and landscape features; and support services for the
residents. A mix of architectural elements had been incorporated into the
buildings to be compatible with single-story ranch style adobe structures.
Although the buildings would be larger and taller than adjacent one- and two-
story commercial and residential structures, the overall mass and height of the
three-story units had been addressed through varied wall planes and roof lines; a
variety of material and color elements; appropriate setbacks perimeter walls and
landscaping, and balcony features to provide a more pedestrian scale along the
street; and 3) Staff believed the proposed demolition of the adobe structures
would be appropriate because the more historically and architecturally significant
Weir Bros. adobe structures (offices and circular apartment units) would be
preserved on site and incorporated into the project design and facility operation.
The proposed demolition/preservation plan and historic mitigation measures also
were recommended for approval by the Historic Preservation Commission.
Vice-chairman McQuead and staff discussed the proposed materials and color
for the perimeter wall for the project.
Commissioner Hale felt the color of the new facilities should be consistent with
other buildings in the area.
Commissioner Winton and staff discussed the proposed modifications with
regard to the 15 th Avenue fencing. Staff noted that the overhead utilities and
3 of 9
fencing would be removed along with enhancing the landscaping along 15 th
Avenue.
Commissioner Romo asked if the facility would incorporate elevators. Mr. Paul
replied in the negative.
Chairman Weber asked if the project had a secondary access point. Mr. Paul
replied in the negative.
Commissioner Winton suggested using faux adobe or adobe design elements in
order to create a more consistent look with the historic adobe structures. He also
suggested expanding the color pallet of the new structures and utilizing slump
block for the perimeter wall.
Vice-chairman McQuead stated he did not object to the use of a white color but
concurred with expanding the color pallet for the new construction. He
suggested creating some type of protection for the entry doors from weather and
sun on the southern side of the facility. He also suggested using slump block
block for the perimeter wall with a mortar wash finish in order to create
consistency with the adobe structures.
Chairman Weber felt the color palate should be consistent with the existing
buildings and Weir adobe structures. He suggested creating some type of
protection for the entry doors from weather and sun on the southern side of the
facility as well as incorporating architectural treatments on the east facing
buildings so neighbors would not subjected to a bland wall. He suggested
incorporating design elements into the perimeter wall consistent with the Weir
Brother adobe structures. He also expressed concern with blank walls lending
themselves to graffiti.
Kent Trimble, representing Veteran's Village, provided an overview of the
project and noted that the project incorporated staff's recommendations. He
stated that the new facility would serve both active and non-active veterans by
providing permanent housing. He then provided an overview of the amenities for
the project.
Chairman Weber questioned why elevators were not proposed for the project.
Mr. Trimble noted that elevators were not required. He stated that all of their
apartments were furnished, thus reducing the need for elevators. He also stated
that their other complexes did not have elevators.
Commissioner Romo expressed his concern with the facility not having an
elevator. Mr. Trimble noted that they could accommodate anyone with physical
disabilities on the first floor.
4 of 9
Greg Le Fiore, Architect, stated that they were open to incorporating other
colors, noting that their theory behind the white color was to create a contrast
and not try to compete with the existing historic adobe structures. He stated that
they would take the Commission's input and incorporate it into the project.
Commissioner Johns asked Mr. Trimble if their funding was defined for Veterans
only. Mr. Trimble replied in the affirmative and then provided an overview of the
limitations on the property given the previous use of VA funding to purchase the
site.
Commissioner Johns and Mr. Trimble discussed what constituted a family with
regard to occupancy.
Commissioner Romo, Commissioner Spann, and Mr. Trimble discussed the
proposed funding for the project.
ACTION:
Moved by Commissioner Hale, seconded by Vice-chairman McQuead, to approve
staffs recommendation. Motion carried unanimously. (7-0)
2. AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING CODE — AZ 15-0001:
REQUEST: A proposed amendment to Article 49 of the Escondido Zoning Code
regarding Air Space Condominium and Community Apartment Projects, to
provide an exception from the condominium permit requirement for new
commercial and industrial condominium projects that otherwise comply with
Subdivision Map Act and City public noticing requirements. The amendment will
also increase the minimum contingency fee requirement for condominium
conversion projects and eliminate the fee requirement for new construction, allow
for administrative approval of minor changes to proposed condo projects on a
case-by-case basis, and include other minor text revisions for clarity purposes.
The proposal includes the adoption of the environmental determination prepared
for the project.
PROPERTY SIZE AND LOCATION: Citywide
Bill Martin, Deputy Planning Director, referenced the staff report and noted staff's
main issue was whether the proposed changes were appropriate. Staff
recommended approval based on the following: 1) The elimination of the
condominium permit requirement for new industrial and commercial
condominium projects would streamline the approval process, which would help
to promote the establishment of businesses in Escondido. The requirement to
5 of 9
obtain parcel map approval would remain in place, as mandated by the
Subdivision Map Act; 2) Allowing for administrative approval of minor changes to
proposed condominium projects would also help to streamline the permit
process, since it would eliminate the need for a hearing in some cases. The
decision to approve a change administratively would be made on a case-by-case
basis, which would give staff the discretion to seek planning commission
approval when warranted; 3) The increase in the minimum contingency fund
requirement from $500 to $1000 per unit would ensure that a condominium
conversion project had sufficient reserves to pay for any emergencies or repairs
that may arise within common areas of the development. This would enable
Escondido to retain a supply of high-quality, well-maintained condominium
projects. Staff had concluded the fee was not warranted for new condominium
construction where there is no deferred maintenance and the establishment of a
reserve fund was already mandated by the California Bureau of Real Estate.
Commissioner Hale asked if an applicant could take advantage of the State's
exemption criteria for commercial condo conversion projects as well as new
commercial condo construction. Mr. Martin stated that the Subdivision Map Act
did not discern between new construction and conversions when determining
whether commercial condominium projects were except from the Tentative Map
requirement.
Commissioner Winton questioned whether small postage stamp, commercial
parcel map projects would be prohibited. Mr. Martin replied in the negative.
Commissioner Johns and staff discussed what constituted a major change to a
condominium development that would still require Council approval.
Commissioner Hale suggested modifying the language to add commercial and
industrial condo conversions to the condominium permit exception, noting his
view that conversions should not be excluded. Mr. Martin noted that the
Planning Commission could make that recommendation.
ACTION:
Moved by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Johns, to approve
staffs recommendation. The motion included adding commercial and industrial
condominium conversions to the projects that would be exempt from the
Condominium Permit requirement. Motion carried unanimously. (7-0)
6 of 9
CURRENT BUSINESS:
1. Discussion regarding the unauthorized changes occurring at the
Escondido Sports and Fitness facility (Case No. PHG 15-0002);
located at 130 E. Lincoln Avenue.
Bill Martin, Deputy Planning Director, provided the staff report and noted that the
purpose of this item was to initiate a conversation with the Planning Commission
regarding options for resolving the current situation where the property appears
to be in the process of being converted to an unauthorized use as a banquet
hall/ballroom facility. Planning staff could continue processing the applicant's
incomplete CUP application by requesting expensive traffic and noise studies
and design modifications for a use that may not be supportable. Another option
could involve revoking the current CUP for a fitness facility given that 24 off-site
parking spaces previously authorized at the adjacent Domino's property are no
longer available and current on-site parking did not meet the requirements for a
fitness facility. The applicant could also reestablish the fitness club use in effect
at the time he acquired the property and potentially bring the facility back into
compliance by building new parking spaces where the pool was located. The
property is located in the CG (General Commercial) zone, which allowed the
greatest range of commercial uses so potential opportunities for the site appear
to exist.
Commissioner Winton asked if neighbors were concerned with lights and noise.
Mr. Martin noted that the neighbors expressed concern several years ago when
there was a proposal to convert one of the tennis courts to an outdoor basketball
court.
Vice-chairman McQuead asked if the applicant had been given deadlines.
Mr. Martin noted that several stop-work orders had been issued and staff had
given a deadline to file the appropriate land use permits, noting that the applicant
had filed an incomplete application for a CUP modification. He noted that staff
was looking to the Commission as to whether the proposed use could be
supported in the subject location.
Vice-chairman McQuead asked if the applicant had provided any parking plans to
staff. Mr. Martin replied in the affirmative, noting that they were looking at
creating additional parking in the tennis court and demolished pool areas.
Vice-chairman McQuead questioned whether staff could provide direction to the
applicant regarding what the best use of the property would be given the limited
parking. Mr. Martin replied in the affirmative. He also stated that the property
owner had already expended significant funds on their proposed use and had
advertised the facility as being available to the public.
7 of 9
Commissioner Johns asked if the YMCA had provided any input or comments
regarding the current use being a good neighbor. Mr. Martin replied in the
negative.
Commissioner Hale asked if the subject property was sold in the last year.
Mr. Martin replied in the affirmative.
Commissioner Hale expressed his concern with the new owner not adhering to
the City's codes and permit process. He did not feel the property could provide
adequate parking to meet the proposed use.
Commissioner Spann stated that it appeared there was a blatant disregard to
complying with the City's codes. He suggested giving a deadline to meet the
conditions of the CUP, and if they could not be met that the CUP be revoked.
Discussion ensued regarding a clarification of the City's occupancy limits.
Commissioner Romo did not feel adequate parking could be provided to meet the
proposed use.
Commissioner Johns asked if religious activities were occurring at the subject
site. Mr. Martin stated staff was unaware of whether religious activities were
occurring on the site.
Chairman Weber expressed his view that the current parking was not adequate
to meet the approved fitness use let alone the proposed use.
Commissioner Winton felt staff needed to indicate a willingness to work with the
applicant on the highest and best use for the property and at the same time let
the owner know the ramifications of not adhering to the City's codes.
The discussion concluded and no action was taken by the Commission on this
item.
ORAL COMMUNATIONS: None.
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Chairman Weber noted that he attended the SANDAG-sponsored meeting that was
held in the Mitchell Room to discuss the new San Diego Forward Regional Plan.
8 of 9
ADJOURNMENT:
Chairman Weber adjourned the meeting at 8:49 p.m. The next meeting was
scheduled for June 9, 2015, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 201 North
Broadway, Escondido, California.
Ed 71taittea 7v Pautdoo
Bill Martin, Secretary to the Escondido Ty Paulson, Minutes Clerk
Planning Commission
9 of 9
Get email alerts for Escondido
A daily email when new agendas and minutes are posted.