Also serving the communities of De Luz, Rainbow, Camp Pendleton, Pala and Pauma

Opinions vary on Pala Mesa highlands project - Planning Commission recommends rezone

The county’s Planning Commission voted 6-1 March 9 to recommend approval of a Specific Plan Amendment, rezone, tentative map, and Major Use Permit for the Pala Mesa Highlands project.

Since a Specific Plan Amendment must be approved by the San Diego County Board of Supervisors, the Planning Commission hearing will be followed by a Board of Supervisors hearing at a future date. The recommended plan amendment would allow for 124 single-family residential lots, at least half of which would be single-story.

The Planning Commission, as well as public speakers on both sides, compared the new plan to the current Private Development Plan (PDP) and addressed various issues. “Every one of these issues is better under this,” said Planning Commissioner Adam Day.

“The PDP is outdated,” said Tony Del Grippo, the vice president of land acquisition and forward planning for Beazer Homes.

Michael Beck, the sole Planning Commissioner to oppose the recommendation, also cited recent information, specifically gnatcatcher habitat within the footprint. “This project area supports five gnatcatcher pairs,” Beck said. “There is no way in my mind that those findings can be made.”

The 124 residential units and related recreational facilities would be located on 84.6 acres within areas C, D, and E of the Pala Mesa Private Development Plan. The current PDP has a Specific Plan Area (21) land use designation with an overall density of 2.75 dwelling units per acre, while the Specific Plan Amendment would establish a density of 1.5 dwelling units per acre. A concurrent rezone would replace A70, RS7, RV3, and RV4 agricultural and residential zoning with S88 specific plan zoning including a net density of 1.7 dwelling units per acre and a minimum lot size of 5,500 square feet. The Specific Plan Amendment and rezone would not change the “B” and “P” designators which make development subject to I-15 corridor and Fallbrook design guidelines, and the requirement for a planned residential development (PRD) would remain.

The tentative map would develop 48.1 acres with 36.5 acres comprising an open space lot. The map will include 3.9 gross acres, including 2.4 usable acres, for a main recreation area, which is an increase from the 1.8 acres previously proposed. That recreation area would contain a swimming pool, clubhouse, playground, open turf area, putting green, tennis court, and parking. A second recreation area of 0.4 acres will contain a private pocket park with a barbecue and picnic area, benches, and an open play area. A third recreation area will be an 0.07-acre passive recreation area which will provide a pedestrian linkage to the project trail system; a private trail 0.7 miles long will be constructed and a public trail will be constructed along Old Highway 395. The Major Use Permit is necessary to implement the PRD requirements and maintain the recreation facilities.

The project also includes public improvements to the intersection of Old Highway 395 and State Route 76 and to the project frontage on Pala Mesa Drive and Old Highway 395.

The Planning Commission had voted to recommend denial of a project covering that area in January 2006, although that project covered 145 lots. The land was sold to Beazer Homes in April 2004, although the previous application had been filed under a previous ownership.

“Staff believes this project is significantly improved,” said Maggie Loy, the project manager for the county’s Department of Planning and Land Use (DPLU). A subsequent Environmental Impact Report was filed in January 2007 after public review in September and October 2006.

Although DPLU believes that the compatibility issues raised during earlier hearings have been addressed, the Fallbrook Community Planning Group voted in October 2006 to recommend a duplex housing alternative. That alterative would limit the number of lots to 130, limit two-story units to 20 percent, limit each unit to three bedrooms, increase side yards from five to ten feet, use additional land creatively for ambience, retain the road design and footprint, reduce grading, retain the previous home size limits, restrict master bedrooms to the ground floor, and require pathways or sidewalks on the streets.

“There’s no reason to do a rezone of this project,” said Fallbrook Community Planning Group chair Jim Russell. “The planning group has consistently said, ‘Build the project the way it’s zoned.’”

Russell noted that with the exception of the three areas covered by the Pala Mesa Highlands project the PDP has been developed in accordance with the plan. “This will be the first project that’s proposing block walls,” he said. “None of the other projects in the PDP have block walls.”

Russell also questioned the alternatives of the subsequent Environmental Impact Report. “None of these alternative projects match the footprint of the PDP,” he said.

Harry Christiansen, the first vice-chair of the Fallbrook Community Planning Group, noted that acceptance of the project would indicate that the planned residential development no longer exists. “The project as presented to you makes a big assumption,” Christiansen said. “They do not meet our standards.”

The Pala Mesa PDP covers a total of 421 acres. It was adopted in 1973, after the golf course was constructed in 1962 and after the Pala Mesa Village single-family homes were constructed in 1968. At the time U.S. Highway 395 was the main north-south road carrying traffic through Fallbrook; Interstate 15 was not constructed until the early 1980s.

The original PDP encompassed the golf course and resort and proposed additional recreational facilities and lodge units as well as planned residential developments for 691 units in eight areas and estate residential development of 18 residences in six areas along the steeper portions of the site. The PDP has been amended twice, adding nine PRD units and removing two residential estate lots. The developed areas include Pala Mesa Greens, Pala Mesa Country Club Villas, Pala Mesa Oaks, and Pala Mesa Fairway Villas. Of those four, only the 28 Pala Mesa Oaks lots are single-family homes.

The PDP designated Area D as single-family residential but limited the majority of units in Areas C and E to two bedrooms with a two-story limitation.

Most of the 92 Pala Mesa Village homes are single-story, although remodeling, including some second-story additions, has been occurring as allowed by the site’s zoning.

The Pala Mesa Highlands homes would range between 2,400 and 3,600 square feet. “They’re totally changing the character of this area,” Christiansen said.

Christiansen noted that the PRD included 40 percent open space. “They put a standard subdivision on what should be a PRD,” he said.

Eileen Delaney, the second vice-chair of the Fallbrook Community Planning Group, noted that the Beazer Homes average of 3,141 square feet is three times the footage of many homes in the area.

“They met with the community, but they never once listened to what we had to say,” Russell said.

Del Grippo noted that the 114 acres of open space on the public golf course provide some open space amenities within the PDP. He also noted that the 36.5 acres of on-site open space would be complemented by 35 acres of off-site mitigation.

The original plan was for 69 two-story and 55 single-story homes, although Del Grippo was amenable to a request that no more than half the homes be two-story structures. “Compatible does not mean identical,” Del Grippo said.

None of the residents of the PDP’s developed areas have views of the project site from their homes, and the homes would not be noticeable from Interstate 15 or Highway 395. “We have created a private enclave amongst ourselves,” Del Grippo said.

Areas C and E allow for 303 units. “We are downsizing that project considerably,” Del Grippo said.

“If we had our way, our sleepy little quiet community is going to remain like it is, but that’s not going to happen,” said Via Altamira resident David Engle. “Beazer, in my opinion, has bent over backward to accommodate us.”

The Pala Mesa Village Homeowners Association indicated support for the project, although in 2002 a petition was submitted in opposition to opening interior circulation between Pala Mesa Village and the project. Nearby residents have differing views about the new development, but Engle sees a positive impact.

“I think we’re going to have a higher quality of neighbor,” Engle said. “Our bottom line is how it affects our village.”

Bernd Haferkamp of Via Inca noted that the wall would protect the neighbors against rattlesnakes and coyotes. “The proposed single-family is far superior,” he said. “We’re looking forward to having a high-quality neighbor like Beazer.”

Bill Ferro of Teran Drive also favored the single-family option. “Fallbrook is a community of single-family homes,” he said. “A duplex or condo project does not improve our community.”

Jackie McFarland of Convertible Lane also favored the single-family option. “This plan is better suited for Fallbrook,” she said.

“We need more quality affordable homes in Fallbrook and Bonsall, not more duplexes and condos,” said Linda Cooper of Del Cielo Este in Bonsall.

Cooper noted that condos built in the 1980s and 1990s are now being rented. She cited higher crime rates and less off-street parking by the condos. “To keep our quality of life we need family homes, not more condos,” she said.

“I think the kids should grow up with a nice yard,” said Greg Valdez, who was born and raised in Fallbrook and now lives on Fallbrook Street.

Jona Carlson of Darla Lane cited the high vacancy rate of condos built in the 1970s and 1980s. “There are also many distressed properties in that area,” she said.

The large size of the homes concerned Jim Oenning, a realtor by profession but also a Lake Rancho Viejo resident and a member of the Fallbrook Community Planning Group and the I-15 Design Review Board. He compared the Pala Mesa Highlands project to the Lake Rancho Viejo development and noted that approximately 50 homes in the older part of Lake Rancho Viejo have multiple families living in the houses.

Oenning cited one four-bedroom house with 11 children and three sets of parents. “You need to deal with that as three houses, not one house,” he said.

Irv Rudderow lives in a 1,300 square foot house on Arboles Court. “The size of these homes are quite large,” he said.

“The smallest house in their proposal is twice the size of the average house in the area,” said Via Almonte resident Antonia Niciphor. “I still fail to see the compatibility.”

Ridge Heights Drive resident Anne Burdick noted that duplexes provide more open space for children and are separate houses with a common wall. “I think they’re playing on our old stereotype of duplexes,” she said.

Alice Wheaton addressed the second access near the fire station. “There should be very strong consideration of the egress and access to this development,” she said. “Are we going to have to put stop signs on every cul-de-sac?”

Del Grippo responded that traffic studies didn’t warrant a second ingress/egress point on Old Highway 395 and that cutting through a ridgeline would be necessary for a Pala Mesa Drive access. The principal access to and from the project would be from Old Highway 395, but internal circulation would connect to development to the south using Todos Santos Road. The internal streets created by Pala Mesa Highlands would be dedicated as public roads.

“The single-family project they are proposing is more appropriate for Temecula,” said Diegos Court resident Len Berkstresser.

Berkstresser encouraged the Planning Commission members to take a look at Lake Rancho Viejo. “I don’t think you will consider it a desirable place to live or have in your neighborhood,” he said. “We prefer an upscale condo project.”

Beck noted that the off-site mitigation plan had not been completed. “The content of the management plan is the mitigation. It’s not the development of a management plan,” he said.

“This is not consistent with a deal’s a deal,” Beck said. “I’m very disappointed.”

Biologist Diana Ortiz of Recon Environmental noted that one gnatcatcher site had no observed birds since 2001. She also noted that enough habitat in the four other areas would remain to allow viability for gnatcatchers. “They’re expected to persist,” she said.

Beazer has proposed the creation of a habitat management plan which would be managed by the Fallbrook Land Conservancy. Beazer is in preparation of the off-site mitigation plan.

Planning Commission Bryan Woods had hoped for more single-story homes, but he accepted the 50 percent compromise. He noted the community desire for single-family homes. “They want single family. They don’t want duplexes,” he said.

 

Reader Comments(0)

 
 
Rendered 03/29/2024 06:04