Res 88-138RESOLUTION NO. 88-138
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF POWAY, CALIFORNIA
AMENDING THE SOUTH POWAY SPECIFIC PLAN
(SPA 88-01C)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Poway recognizes that the need may
arise to amend the City's General Plan; and
WHEREAS, Section 65350, et seq., of the California Government Code describes
the procedures for amending General Plans; and
WHEREAS, on July 30, 1985, the City Council adopted a resolution approving
the South Poway Planned Community (SPPC) Development Plan, and said plan has
been prepared and adopted as a specific plan, and provides for the systematic
implementation of the Poway General Plan; and
WHEREAS, Volume 2 (Development Standards) of the SPPC Development Plan con-
tains procedures for amending the subject Development Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has initiated South Poway Specific Plan Amendment
(SPA 88-01C) involving amendments to the text and graphics of the adopted South
Poway PC Development Plan (Volume 1, Development Plan and Volume 2, Development
Standards); and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that, in order to further the goal of the
Housing Element of the Poway Comprehensive Plan to make suitable housin§
available to all economic segments of the community, it is desirable to require
common ownership of all mobilehome park spaces and coaches; and
WHEREAS, on October 25, 1988, the City Council of the City of Poway held a
properly noticed public hearing in accordance with the California Government
Code and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to consider that
request, and said public hearing was continued by the City Council to November
22, 1988; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearings the City Council considered the
Environmental Initial Study (EIS) prepared for SPA 88-01C, and said EIS along
with the previously certified Final EIR and Final Subsequent EIR for the South
Poway Specific Plan adequately addressed the potential environmental effects of
the proposed amendments under SPA 88-01C, and following the November 22, 1988
public hearing, the City Council determined that the proposed amendments under
SPA 88-01C will not cause any significant adverse environmental impacts and
issued a Negative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby amend the
text and graphics of the South Poway Specific Plan (Volumes i and 2) as follows:
Land Use and Zoning Redesignation: The following figures shall be
amended as described below:
Resolution No. 88-138
Page 2
Volume i (Development Plan):
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figures 9
Figure 15
Figure 18
Figure 19
Figure 20
Figure 21
Figure 22
Figure 24
Figure 26
Figure 48
7 (Land Use Concept Plan with Limits of Gradin§)
8 (Land Use Concept Plan)
8a (Subareas)
through 13 (Depicting Subareas i through 5, respectively)
(Proposed Street Design)
(Transit Service)
IBicycle Circulation)
IEquestrian/Hiking Trails)
(Water Facilities)
ISewerage Facilities)
(Proposed Drainage Facilities)
ICross Section Locations)
(Zoning)
The following tables within Volume i (Development Plan), Section II (Land
Use Element) shall be amended as described below:
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Table 6
(South Poway Planned Community Development Plan - Net Acreage)
ISubarea i Land Use Acreage Analysis - Net Acreage)
ISubarea 2 Land Use Acreage Analysis - Net Acreage)
~Subarea 3 Land Use Acreage Analysis - Net Acreage)
ISubarea 4 Land Use Acreage Analysis - Net Acreage)
(Subarea 5 Land Use Acreage Analysis - Net Acreage)
All subarea descriptions within Section II (Land Use Element) shall be
modified appropriately in accordance with the proposed amendments as
described below.
Section III (Development Intensity Element) and Section VIII (Overall
Implementation Plan) shall also be modified in accordance with the amend-
ments described below. In addition, Volume 2 (Development Standards),
Chapter 4 (Residential Development Standards) shall also be amended accor-
dingly.
Proposed Amendments
All areas within the South Poway Specific Plan that are currently designated
RR-A, RR-C, and SF-2 have been reviewed for dwelling unit allocation and
associated environmental impacts. With the exception of the Creek Road
Enclave (subject of SPA 88-01B) and the McMillin property at the southwest
corner of the intersection of Pomerado Road (realigned) and the South Poway
Parkway, all other areas, as discussed in the following paragraphs shall be
removed from further consideration for residential development and rede-
signated as permanent open space land use. More specifically, these pro-
posed open space designation areas are shown on Exhibit A hereof and further
identified as follows:
Resolution No. 88-138
Page 3
Northern Perimeter of Planning Area
o The vacant RR-A area south of Poway Creek Road and east and west of
Midland Road
o The vacant RR-C area south of Poway Creek Road, east of Midland Road, and
adjacent to the northerly Community Plan boundary
o The vacant RR-A area in the northeastern corner of the Community Plan
area and north of South Poway Parkway as shown on Exhibit A hereof
NOTE: The developing 40 acre Los Lomas project area, zoned RR-C,
and traversed by Midland Road, is to remain RR-C.
Southern Perimeter of Plannin~ Area
o The RR-C area located on the north side of Creek Road/Beeler Canyon Road
and substantially within or adjacent to the floodplain of Beeler Creek,
as shown on Exhibit A hereof. Existing residential uses would continue
as legal non-conforming uses.
° All RR-A and RR-C land located within Beeler Canyon and particularly
located on the south facing slopes between the South Loop Road (Kirkham
Drive), the southerly planning area boundary, and east of Pomerado Road.
All existing residential uses would continue as legal non-conforming
uses.
o The RR-C area constituent to the existing Padre Transit operation and the
RR-A area representing a potential expansion area of current surface
mining activities.
NOTE: The South Poway Plan (Sub-Area 5 Land Use, Volume 1) states:
When mining operations are complete, that portion
of the area at elevations similar to Beeler Canyon
will be converted to rural residential uses, while
portions of the site that remain at upper elevations
consistent with the central area will be developed
as Industrial (LI),
This statement shall be modified to indicate that, ",,.that portion of
the area at elevations similar to Beeler Canyon will be converted to open
space."
o All undeveloped RR-A, RR-C, and SF-2 designated lands located to the
south and east of the intersection of South Poway Parkway/South Loop
Road, and between the South Poway Parkway and the southerly Community
Plan boundary in the southeastern corner of the planning area.
Resolution No. 88-138
Page 4
The redesignation of the RR-A, RR-C, and SF-2 lands described above to open
space is supported by the following findings:
The areas proposed for redesignation to open space consist of visually
prominent hillsides and ridgelines which substantially block views of the
central portion of the planning area from the north and south.
The proposed redesignation to open space would ensure the retention of
an open space buffer on the perimeter of the South Poway community,
thereby maintaining a rural setting in this portion of the City of
Poway.
The proposed redesi§nation would result in an adequate physical separa-
tion and relationship between industrial and non-industrial land uses,
thereby fostering land use compatibility and avoiding potential land use
friction.
The proposed redesignation would achieve a major design concept of the
adopted South Poway Plan by preserving significant visual buffers between
Poway's existing development and the area of the Plan proposed for indus-
trial/commercial development.
The proposed redesignation would foster good land use and city planning
in that the development of isolated pockets of residential uses requiring
the full range of municipal services, facilities, utilities, and asso-
ciated costs, would be avoided.
The proposed redesignation would result in the reduction of potential
environmental impacts in the areas of soils/geology, drainage, air
quality, visual quality, utilities and public services, biology, traffic
generation, groundwater quality, and also significant natural land
resources such as hillsides, canyons, ridgelines, and natural creek
channels.
It is hereby indicated that the Creek Road Enclave (subject of SPA 88-01B) is
allocated 20 additional dwelling units for a total of 29 units. Furthermore,
the total number of dwelling units allowed within the boundaries of the South
Poway Specific Plan (Planned Community Development Plan) is hereby reduced from
289 units to 231 units, indicating a delection of 58 dwelling units. The
remainin§ unallocated 17 units may be allocated to the area west of Pomerado and
south of South Poway Parkway by a future Specific Plan Amendment.
2. Redesi~nations from Industrial Park (IP) to Light Industrial (LI)
Exhibit B hereof depicts the lots subject to the redesignation. As shown,
they include Lots 22 and 23, and a portion of 24, 25, and 27 of Tract 85-04,
all located on the west side of Community Road and between Stowe Drive and
South Poway Parkway. The subject lots have frontage and direct access off
Danielson Court. The map insert shows the current designation of the sub-
ject area. As shown on the insert, Lot 22 is partially designated LI and
the rest of the subject lots are zoned IP.
Resolution No. 88-138
Page 5
The subject redesignation would not adversely affect the business park
setting or viability of the emerging industrial land uses. This deter-
mination is based on the followin§ factors:
Sales Tax: It is probable that LI property will generate greater sales
tax revenues than IP uses.
Traffic Generation: LI permitted uses would on the average generate
fewer ADT's and, therefore, would have a lesser impact on traffic
resulting in an overall decrease in traffic impacts.
Insufficient IP Market: There is currently not a market in Poway for
research and development type land uses because of the presence of com-
peting business park projects along the Interstate 15 corridor.
3. Circulation Plan Amendment
Volume i (Development Plan), Section IV (Transportation Element), Figure 15
(Proposed Street Design) is shown as Exhibit C hereof. The "Proposed Street
Design" figure and all other applicable figures within Volume I shall be
modified as described below.
Pomerado Road: Pomerado Road has been realigned and eventually will be
fully improved between Poway Road and the southerly City boundary. Old
Pomerado Road would be terminated in a cul-de-sac northwest of the new
Pomerado Road/South Poway Parkway intersection. The circulation plan should
be amended to reflect these changes as they directly relate to the internal
circulation of South Poway.
Stowe Drive: Stowe Drive is now constructed between the Cadillac Fairview
Phase One project and the newly aligned Pomerado Road. This new street con-
figuration should be reflected on the circulation plan.
New Beeler Canyon Road: The original purpose of this new roadway was to
serve as access to the residential designated lands which adjoin Beeler
Canyon. If these lands were redesignated to permanent open space and not
developed, the need for the new roadway would be eliminated. Current resi-
dences in Beeler Canyon east of Padre Transit could continued to use the
existing roadway for access to the east and west. This proposed roadway,
between the Padre Transit operation on the west and Sycamore Canyon Road on
the east, should be deleted from the South Poway Circulation Plan if
adjoining rural residential land uses are eliminated.
Other Text Changes to Circulation Plan
Volume 2 - Development Standards, Chapter 2, Section I, Street
Standards:
Street Lighting: As presently written the standards require Low
Pressure Sodium, 135 watt street lights for all primary and major
arterials, commercial/industrial collector roads with and without
medians, and commercial/industrial streets. The 135-watt specifica-
tion should be changed to 180 watt low pressure sodium.
Resolution No. 88-138
Page 6
Typical Street Sections: As depicted below, several amendments are
recommended for typical street sections.
The general utility easement (G.U.E.) for the commercial/
industrial collector road, "with and without" medians, should be
increased from five feet to ten feet. This change would serve to
alleviate conflicts between utilities, street improvements, and
construction outside, but close to, the right-of-way line.
COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL COLLECTOR ROAD WITH MEDIAN
R/W R/W
sidewalk
I 6° bicycle lane
Community Road only
Ty[ ic i Secf~cn
no scale
COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL COLLECTOR ROAD WITHOUT MEDIAN
R/W R/W ~
· S' bicycle Iai
sidewalk Community Road only
Typical Section
no scale
Resolution No. 88-138
Page 7
The right-of-way dimensions for a typical commercial industrial
street should be changed from 33 feet/45 feet to 49 feet as shown
below.
COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL STREET
sidewalk
Midland Road or~ly
~'. t. 16'~, 16' ~.
"~~ -il, ~" bicycle lane
Midland Road only
Typic. i Section
no scale
R/W
4. Travel De~,~ana i4anage[~ent (TD~,i) Plan
The TDiq Plan was prepared by Kunzman Associates as part of the South Poway
Subsequent EIR. Pages 45 through 68 of 72 in the October 25, 1988 agenda
report contain the subject plan.
The subject TDM Plan is hereby approved for incorporation into the South
Poway document (Volume 2, Development Standards).
5. Building Separation and Slope Setback Requirements
Volume II - Development Standards, contains the following table and notes
concerning building setbacks within South Poway.
Table I
Building Setback Summary
Light Industrial South Poway
Industrial Park Commercial
Front Yard 35'
Rear Yard 0/20'
Exterior side (corner parcels) yard 35'
Interior side yards (sum of) 40'
35' 35'
0/20' ~/20'
35' 35'
40' 40'
Resolution No. 88-138
Page 8
Notes:
1. Rear yards which abut streets shall be considered exterior side yards.
2. When either rear yard or exterior side yard abut the South Pop, ay
Arterial, the 50 foot landscaped setback requirement shall supercede
minimum building setbacks and, in those cases, the minimum building
setback shall be 50'
3. For all buildings over 250 feet in length an additional one (1) foot
front yard setback per ten (10) feet of length to a maximum fifty (50)
feet from the property line shall be required.
4. Sideyard and rear yard setbacks shall be O' or 20' or greater where no
slope exists, but in no case shall the sum of the sideyards on each
lot be less than 40'.
5. Sideyard and read yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 10 feet where
slope height along the associated property line is 7 feet or less.
6. Sideyard and rear yard setbacks shall be dictated by the grading
ordinance setback criteria where associated slopes are higher than 7
feet.
7. All setbacks are measured fro~ property line.
The implen~entation of notes 5, 6, ano 7 i~as been determined to be cumbersorae
and lacking the flexibility needed for ~ne siting of structures in the
Po~erado Business Park.
The following refinement note No. 5 anO grapilic replace notes 5, 6, and 7.
As illustrated belo~, where adjoining property side
and/or rear yards are separated by slopes, the horizontal
distance between buildings shall be no less than 20 feet,
and the distance between a building and the top or toe
of slope shall be a minimum of five (5) feet.
MINIMUM BUILDING SEPARTION/SLOPE SETBACK
(For Properties AOjo~ning Slopes)
Note:
The common property line between adjoining lots
is shown in three possible locations; at the
top, middle, or toe of slopes.
Resolution No. 88-138
Page 9
6. Other Miscellaneous Amendments to Volume I
INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL SITE/BUILDING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Site Utilization - Loading Areas: The Development Standards contain the
following standard for loading areas. The underscored and crossed-out
text indicates the amendment and deletion to the text, respectively.
5d.
Side loading areas and doors are permitted in the IP, LI,
and SPC zones and must be screened by a concrete or masonry
wall a minimum of six feet and up to not !:~s th:n 12 feet
high, texture~ or ~l~r~d~ to match the main building, and
located no closer to a street than the applicable parking
setback requirement.
The amendment is necessary to add flexibility to the standard, especially
in cases where the placement of a 12 foot high wall within the front or
street sideyard setback may be undesirable due to site line restrictions
or aesthetic concerns.
o Architecture-E~uipment Screens: Standard 4a reads as follows, and the
proposed revision is shown.
4a.
All roof-mounted equipment and/or duct work shall be screened by
an enclosure of equal or greater height and shall be consistent
with the building design, building materials, and exterior colors.
This amendment is necessary in order to achieve architectural com-
patibility, building scale, and a pleasing aesthetic appearance.
7. Mobile Home Parks Proposed Amendments
Volumes i and 2 of the South Poway Plan should be amended as follows:
A. Volume i (Development Plan)
o The description of Subarea 4 of the planning area includes the
following language:
The mobilehome area may develop as either owner-
occupied or rental units.
This language should be revised to read as follows:
Coaches and lots within mobile home parks must be
must be held in common ownership.
Resolution No. 88-138
Page 10
Graphic revisions are necessary since map figures within Volume 1
indicate that the "Park May Be Rented or Owner Occupied." Staff
recommends that this map note be deleted from the following figures
in Volume 1.
Figure 8 - Land Use Concept Plan
Figure 12 - Subarea 4 Land Use
B. Volume 2 (Development Standards)
The following language within Chapter 4 (Residential Development
Standards) of Volume 2 should be revised as shown, with crossed-
out language indicating deletion and underscored language
indicatin§ addition:
Mobilehome parks must be developed on sites at
least 20 acres in size. ,,,~th ~ m.v~ .... ~^.~.,.
~¢ ~k+ ~,.,~ ..... ~. ...... * .... Coaches
and lots within a mobilehome park must~e--h~
Tn common ownership.
APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Poway, State of
California, this 22nd day of November, 1988.
Rbberl~ C. Emery, Mayor~
ATTEST:
Marjorie¥. a sten, City Clerk
Resolution No. 88-138
Page 11
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
) ss.
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO )
I, Marjorie K. Wahlsten, City Clerk of the City of Poway, do hereby certify,
under the penalty of perjury, that the foregoing Resolution, No. 88-138 , was
duly adopted by the City Council at a meeting of said City Council held on the
22ndday of November , 1988, and that it was so adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: BRANNON, KRUSE, TARZY, EMERY
NOES: NONE
ABSTAIN: HIGGINSON
ABSENT: NONE
R/R-ii-22.1-11
Marj~ Wahlsten, City Clerk
City o~/J~oway
Resolution No. 88-138
.-
PLACE 15
97
22 95
25
27 '", ~'
92
~'o,,,v /
'-' 26.
23
62 j 63
'83
82
81
25
93
80
73
'gO
a4 /
f85J
i 86 j £
79 78 ,
, 77
74 75 76
EX HIBIT/B
E
Resolution No, 88-138
Page 14