PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: SEPTEMBER 21, 2026
SUBJECT:
Title
OAKCREST SPECIFIC PLAN - REQUEST ENTITLEMENTS FOR A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF 257 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES AND A 6.2-ACRE PUBLIC PARK.
LOCATION/APN:
1010-1050 N. TWIN OAKS VALLEY RD AND SURROUNDING UNDEVELOPED AREA / APN(S):
218-110-02, 218-110-03, 218-330-05, 218-330-08, 218-330-09, 218-330-13, 218-330-26, 218-330-27, 218-330-28
CASE NUMBER:
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR25-004), SPECIFIC PLAN (SP25-0004), GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (GPA25-0005), REZONE (R25-0004), SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN (SDP25-0002), SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN (SDP25-0003), TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP (TSM25-0006), AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP25-0001)
Body
Recommendation
Recommend to the City Council APPROVAL of the following in the order set forth below:
1. APPROVE Resolution PC 26-5210 to certify the Environmental Impact Report (EIR25-004);
2. APPROVE Resolution PC 26-5203 (Specific Plan SP25-0004) to adopt the Oakcrest Specific Plan to establish development guidelines and serve as the primary land use, policy, and regulatory document for the project site;
3. APPROVE Resolution PC 26-5204 (General Plan Amendment GPA25-0005) for a land use change of 136.1 acres/project site from Rural Residential (RR) / Agricultural/Residential (AG) to Specific Plan Area (SPA);
4. APPROVE Resolution PC 26-5205 (Rezone R25-0004) for a zone reclassification of 136.1 acres/project site from Estate (R-1-20) / Agriculture 1 (A-1) to Specific Plan Area (SPA); and
5. APPROVE Resolution PC 26-5206 (Site Development Plan SDP25-0002) to allow the construction of 257 single-family homes and associated improvements and amenities;
6. APPROVE Resolution PC 26-5207 (Site Development Plan SDP25-0003) to allow the construction of a 6.2-acre public park;
7. APPROVE Resolution PC 26-5208 (Tentative Subdivision Map TSM25-0006) to establish 145 residential lots, 24 open space/fire buffer/utility/drainage/access lots, one (1) public park lot, and establish 112 residential condominiums; and
8. APPROVE Resolution PC 26-5209 (Conditional Use Permit CUP25-0001) to allow the temporary use of a rock crusher during grading operations.
Body
Introduction
The proposed Oakcrest Specific Plan proposes development of 257 detached single-family homes and a 6.2-acre public park on an approximately 136.1-acre site located on the west side of N. Twin Oaks Valley Rd. between Legacy Dr. and Deerbrook Dr. The project site is currently developed with three single-family homes and accessory structures. Cattle grazing has also occurred on the project site. All existing structures would be demolished in conjunction with the proposed project. Two secondary ridgelines on the project site qualify the project to be subject to the development standards of the Ridgeline Protection and Management Overlay Zone. As designed, the project results in a gross density of 1.89 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) and a net density of 3.88 du/ac. Development is proposed on approximately 84 acres (including homes, streets, recreational open space, landscaped areas, and drainage structures), with approximately 52 acres preserved and maintained as biological open space.
Discussion
The project site consists of nine parcels totaling 136.1 acres and is located in the Twin Oaks Valley neighborhood of the City, approximately 1.25 miles north of State Route 78 (SR-78). The site is largely undeveloped, containing three existing single-family homes and accessory structures that would all be demolished in conjunction with the proposed project. Existing single-family homes are situated to the north and south of the project site with undeveloped and open space areas located to the west. The Twin Oaks Golf Course is located across N. Twin Oaks Valley Rd. to the east.
The project applicant requests approval of a General Plan Amendment, Rezone, Specific Plan, two Site Development Plans (Residential and Public Park), a Tentative Subdivision Map, and a Conditional Use Permit. Approval of these entitlements would allow development of 257 detached single-family homes, associated recreational amenities, a 6.2-acre public park, and preserved biological open space.
General Plan Amendment/Rezone
The 136.1-acre project site currently contains two General Plan Land Use designations and two corresponding zoning designations. Much of the site is designated Rural Residential (RR) with an implementing zone of Estate Residential (R-1-20). These designations allow single-family residences with a density up to 2 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) and limited agricultural uses. A smaller portion of the site is designated Agriculture/Residential (AG) with an implementing Zone of Agriculture 1 (A-1), which allows limited agricultural uses as a primary use and/or single-family residential development at up to 1.0 du/ac based on location and slope. A General Plan Amendment and Rezone are required to change the land use designations and zones of the project site to Specific Plan Area (SPA). The SPA designation and zone are preferred over other established zoning designations since the zone allows for flexibility in development and ensures comprehensive planning of the project site while meeting the goals, objectives, and policies of the City’s General Plan. The proposed Specific Plan is discussed below.
Specific Plan
A Specific Plan serves as a comprehensive planning document that establishes development guidelines for a project site. The proposed Oakcrest Specific Plan would function as the primary land use, policy, and regulatory document for the project by providing a development planning review process for developing residential and recreational uses while preserving approximately 38% of the site as preserved and maintained biological open space as conditioned in the approving project resolutions. The Oakcrest Specific Plan is intended to create an appealing residential community founded on solid design principles and the plan area’s natural features and support development that respects its surrounding environment and community. Objectives of the Specific Plan include establishing development standards and design guidelines that ensure distinctive architecture, landscaping, and recreational amenities to complement and enhance the existing surrounding neighborhood while providing a desirable living environment for residents within the Specific Plan area. The Specific Plan includes design standards and other requirements to achieve the objectives of a high-quality development that supports the housing needs of the City and the region while maximizing preservation of habitat and respecting the ridgelines identified in the Ridgeline Protection and Management Overlay Zone. Furthermore, the project complies with General Plan Goals and Policies as stated below:
San Marcos General Plan Land Use Goal LU-1: Achieve a balanced distribution and compatible mix of land uses to meet the present and future needs of all residents and the business community.
The development per the Specific Plan would add residential units to an underutilized property located adjacent to existing residential development areas and is designated for residential development.
San Marcos General Plan Land Use Goal LU-3: Develop land use patterns that are compatible with and support a variety of mobility opportunities and choices.
The proposed development would construct housing and a public park on an underutilized site. Although transit facilities are located approximately two miles south of the project site, the project would establish bicycle and pedestrian connections to new and existing multi-use trails along segments of N. Twin Oaks Valley Rd. connecting residents with transit near the San Marcos Civic Center Sprinter Station. Additionally, the project would construct internal trails connecting to existing trails and the proposed public park encourages walking and biking to recreational amenities within the community. Thus, development per the proposed Specific Plan supports a variety of mobility opportunities and promotes multimodal transportation.
San Marcos General Plan Land Use Goal LU-5: Promote community design that produces a distinctive, high-quality built environment with forms and character that create memorable places and enrich community life.
The project site will be regulated under the proposed Oakcrest Specific Plan which allows for residential and a new public park. The Specific Plan establishes development plan guidelines and standards such as setbacks, landscaping, and architecture. Active and passive open space and common areas are required within the development to enhance the quality of the built environment and create high quality spaces that enrich community life. Furthermore, the addition of a public park will benefit the surrounding community in addition to the residents of the specific plan area. Implementation of the design standards in the Oakcrest Specific Plan ensures orderly development to help establish neighborhood character compatible with surrounding development and the goals of the General Plan.
San Marcos General Plan Housing Element Goal 1: Provide a broad range of housing opportunities with emphasis on providing housing which meets the special needs of the community.
The Specific Plan proposes replacing three existing single-family homes and agricultural use area with 257 single-family homes at a gross density of 1.89 du/ac and a net density of 3.88 du/ac, which is consistent with the City’s Very Low Density Residential (VLDR) land use designation of 2.1 to 4.0 du/ac. The proposed lower-density housing, along with a variety of home sizes and floorplans, contributes to meeting the housing demands of the community, the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), and provide housing in proximity to SR-78, bus/light rail stations, and employment opportunities.
The project’s location is mainly within the city’s Ridgeline Protection and Management Overlay Zone (ROZ), and as such, lots wholly within the ROZ shall comply with the established rules and regulations identified in Chapter 20.260 of SMMC. This Specific Plan allows for the clustering of residential dwelling units in conformance with the ROZ and the SMMC. One objective of the Specific plan includes locating development in areas below the primary and secondary ridgelines setbacks and maximize preservation of habitat by utilizing existing disturbed agricultural areas and gentler slopes where feasible. All residential units are located outside of the secondary ridgeline setbacks and all development will comply with the requirement of the ROZ. In addition, the location of the public park identified in the General Plan was placed at the northeast corner of the Specific Plan Area where it would be easily accessible by the public and would not encroach on the Secondary Ridgeline setbacks identified in the ROZ.
Additional detailed description of the Specific Plan’s compliance with applicable General Plan Goals and Polices is included within the Oakcrest Specific Plan, attached as Exhibit A of the Specific Plan Resolution (PC 26-5203).
Site Development Plan (Residential)
The proposed residential Site Development Plan contains 257 residential units on a 136.1-acre site, which results in a gross density of 1.89 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) and a net density of 3.88 du/ac. Development is proposed on approximately 83.5 acres (including street dedication), with approximately 52.6 acres preserved as natural open space. Under the residential Site Development Plan (SDP), the project design is reviewed for compliance with applicable development standards of the proposed Oakcrest Specific Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, and other regulatory provisions. The SDP addresses the layout of the 257 residential units, the floor plans and elevations, and associated open space and recreational amenities within the project site. The proposed site plan consists of 145 single-family residential lots ranging from approximately 4,500 square feet (s.f.) to 12,000 s.f. with an average lot size of approximately 7,000 s.f. The remaining 112 detached single-family cluster homes would be developed as a common interest development (condominiums) with 31 units located in the northern portion of the project site next to the future public park and 81 units adjacent to N. Twin Oaks Valley Road. Site and architectural plans for the proposed project are included in Attachment E.
Architecture/Floor Plans
The project would feature two residential product types: single-family and single-family cluster homes. The single-family homes consist of one- and two-stories, while the single-family cluster homes are all designed with two stories. Both product types are detached units approximately 27 feet in height with an attached two- or three-car garage for each unit. The single-family homes would include nine (9) floor plan types ranging in size from approximately 1,900 square feet to approximately 3,300 square feet with three-, four- and five-bedroom units. The single-family cluster homes would have four (4) floor plan types ranging in size from 1,500 square feet to approximately 2,200 square feet with three- and four-bedroom units. The buildings are designed to comply with the maximum building height of 28 feet and two stories as established by the proposed Oakcrest Specific Plan. Exterior building materials primarily consist of painted stucco and concrete tile roofs, with architectural accents such as stone, siding, decorative shutters, and stucco over foam trim. Three color schemes per architectural style provide variation while maintaining a cohesive design and blend with colors found in nearby developments.
The architecture incorporated into the Oakcrest Specific Plan Area is influenced by traditional craftsman, farmhouse, and Spanish style structures. Traditional Craftsman blends classic elements from the Craftsman vernacular with modern construction techniques. Simple massing with a combination of hipped and gabled roof forms are accentuated with stylistic features found in traditional craftsman homes such as decorative (faux) beams, stone or brick veneer at the ground floor, and stucco and board and batten wall materials. The Farmhouse style combines classic elements from the Farmhouse vernacular with contemporary design features. Simple massing with hipped roof forms is enhanced with stylistic features found in a traditional Farmhouse home such as vertical railing and double wood posts at decks, stucco with lap siding, and brick accents. Elements and materials traditionally used for the Spanish Mediterranean style include low pitched roofs using “S” tiles, simple forms with stucco walls, fiber cement trim at selected window enhancements, decorative shutters, decorative pot shelves, decorative metal grilles, accent tiles for a decorative look at select gables and select entryways and stone veneers. The architecture was chosen to complement existing architecture found throughout the City of San Marcos.
In accordance with the current Building Code, all buildings will be equipped with photovoltaic panels to provide solar energy to residential units. In addition, residential units will include energy conservation features such as spray foam insulation, thermal breaks, low-e windows, advanced thermostats, energy star appliances, and sealed insulated ducts. Homes will be Energy Star Certified to meet EPA standards.
Affordable Housing
The proposed 257-unit project would not provide affordable housing units on-site. However, to comply with the City’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (SMMC Chapter 20.310), the project is conditioned to enter into an affordable housing agreement with the City to pay in-lieu fees based on the total number of housing units.
Open Space/Landscaping
Each residential home is designed with a private rear yard or exclusive use space. In addition to private open space, the single-family cluster homes include four common recreational amenity areas consisting of trails, three tot-lot/playgrounds, artificial turf play areas, barbeque and seating areas, and a pickleball court totaling over 35,000 square feet. A minimum ten (10) foot wide decomposed granite public trail is included in the Specific Plan Area to connect Twin Oaks Valley Road to the wider trail system on ‘P’ Mountain above the development. The project will include a combination bike and trail pathway within the right-of-way along Twin Oaks Valley Road. Landscaping throughout the development includes a mixture of trees, shrubs, and ground cover to enhance the proposed buildings along the project frontages as well as interior to the site. The project is conditioned to provide a final landscape plan, and all on-site landscaping will be maintained privately and required to comply with the City’s Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance (SMMC Chapter 20.330) and the project’s Fire Protection Plan (Appendix L of Attachment D). The Fire Protection Plan also identifies required fuel modification zones (totaling 150 feet) measured from structures that must be maintained as a condition of project approval. Landscaping within the rights-of-way for N. Twin Oaks Valley Rd. and a portion of Street ‘A’ will be publicly maintained by the City of San Marcos Public Works Department. A conceptual landscape plan has been provided in the project plans Attachment E.
Grading/Utilities
Grading will consist of approximately 662,300 cubic yards (CY) of cut material and 662,300 CY of fill. Although the site is intended to balance, it is anticipated that as much as 6,750 CY of material will be exported from the site to complete the grading, including utility and foundation trench spoils. Due to the topography of the project site and the design of the project within the site, the amount of retaining walls within the development is limited. Up to an eleven-foot-high retaining wall will be located along the public trail adjacent to Street C and Lots 32 and 31. The project proposes manufactured slopes up to 45 feet in height. Slopes along N. Twin Oaks Valley Road will average 10 to 15 feet in height, with a maximum height of approximately 20 feet. Water and sewer service for the proposed project will be provided by Vallecitos Water District. The project proposes to connect to existing water and sewer facilities in N. Twin Oaks Valley Road. The existing sewer facilities in N. Twin Oaks Valley Road require improvement as noted in the project’s Water and Sewer Study (Appendix T of the EIR (Attachment D)). New storm drains will be constructed in N. Twin Oaks Valley Road to convey storm water from the public park, the residential development, and public street runoff into an existing city storm drain system.
Parking
Parking for the residential project is subject to the parking ratios established by the proposed Oakcrest Specific Plan which is consistent with the City’s Zoning Ordinance for Off-Street Parking. This requires all units to provide a two-car garage (3-car garage is required for homes exceeding 3,000 square feet of living area) with guest parking at one space for every three units for the single-family cluster homes. Using these parking ratios, the proposed project requires a total of 568 parking spaces. At least 609 parking spaces would be provided which includes 531 spaces within attached two- and three-car garages and 37 guest parking spaces throughout the single-family cluster development area. Additional on-street parking for at least 41 vehicles is located along the private streets within the single-family home development area. In accordance with the City’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) requirements, a minimum of five percent (5%) of the required guest parking for the single-family cluster homes shall be equipped with EV charging stations or as otherwise required by CalGreen Building Code, whichever is more stringent. All garages shall be equipped with electric vehicle charging infrastructure in accordance with CalGreen. Four accessible parking spaces would be provided near select private common recreation areas.
Circulation
The project would be accessed from a single road to and from N. Twin Oaks Valley Rd. as a new signalized intersection with Street ‘A’, which would allow all turning movements into and out of the project. A gated emergency-only access would be located at the south end of the project site at the terminus of Street ‘B’.
As part of the project, a dual trail with off-street pedestrian and bicycle facilities would be constructed and/or improved along the project frontage on N. Twin Oaks Valley Rd. An eight-foot-wide bicycle facility is proposed adjacent to N. Twin Oaks Valley Rd., buffered from the travel lanes by a seven-foot-wide landscaped area. An eleven-foot-wide multi-use path is proposed on a slope from the lower bicycle facility along the project frontage on N. Twin Oaks Valley Rd.
At the intersection of Street ‘A’ and N. Twin Oaks Valley Rd., a new traffic signal will be constructed with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant pedestrian ramps at all curb returns and crosswalks. The new crosswalks provide connectivity to an existing trail on the east side of the N. Twin Oaks Valley Rd.
Site Development Plan (Public Park)
A separate Site Development Plan would provide for the development of a 6.2-acre neighborhood park at the northeast corner of the project site along N. Twin Oaks Valley Rd. The development of a park in this area is identified in the General Plan and Parks Master Plan. The public park would accommodate the recreational and open space needs of the proposed development of the Specific Plan.
Early in the development planning process, the developer proposed four park concepts, including a more traditional park with playfields, an event space concept, an equestrian concept, and a pump track concept. Development Services Staff, in collaboration with the Parks and Recreation Department, evaluated the proposed options. Based upon demand and facility deficiencies in the City, a park with lighted playfields would be the most desirable to fulfill resident needs. However, adding lights and nighttime noise activity to this area was determined to be incompatible with the surrounding area. Similarly, adding an event-focused park facility would introduce additional nighttime noise activity to this area and was ultimately removed from consideration. Evaluation of an equestrian concept determined there was not adequate space to provide properly sized facilities, vehicle trailer staging, and parking which is required for a successfully utilized park. Although the City recently opened the dirt bike park within Bradley Park (June 2024), a paved pump track concept was identified as the preferred option among the initial proposals given the growing demand for these facilities and this portion of the park could be closed off at night without large lighting features.
On August 27, 2025, the applicant and City conducted a community information meeting to gather public input on the pump track park concept. Although most comments related to the residential development, a few comments addressed the proposed park. Comments included concerns on noise, privacy, visual impacts, and the overall benefits of the proposed park, especially in relation to existing homes bordering the proposed park to the north. One group expressed support of the concept and requested the City name the park after a former biker in the community.
The developer would be responsible for grading of the park pad and constructing the park amenities. The applicant would dedicate the park to the City, and the City would become responsible for the ongoing maintenance and operation of the park. The conceptual design of the public park includes jump line tracks intended for multiple skill levels, a pump track, and a park green area with seating and a shade pavilion. Landscaped berms are incorporated in the park design to provide a buffer between the existing residences to the north and to N. Twin Oaks Valley Road. The conceptual park features were developed through extensive design review with City Planning and Parks and Recreation staff. The bike track amenities would address a voiced demand in the City and introduce a one-of-a-kind bike track facility to the region. The public may be able to rent out different amenities of the park for private day use. Parking for approximately 60 vehicles is proposed to serve the public park. In addition to the proposed landscaping around the park perimeter, a five-foot berm has been incorporated into the public park design at the northern boundary for visual and noise relief between the park and existing residences, which sit approximately five feet below the park’s proposed finished grade. The base of the berm on the park side is approximately 50 feet from the northern project boundary, with active pump track features located over 100 feet away. The project EIR conservatively evaluates potentially significant noise impacts from the public park and the park’s final design will be required to comply with the noise study requirements of the EIR so that impacts are less than significant at the property line adjacent to residential development.
A final park design, including amenities, and a final landscape plan, will be completed consistent with the approved concept plan to the satisfaction of the Development Services, Parks and Recreation, and Public Works Departments. A park name will be assigned by the City of San Marcos Parks and Recreation Commission per the City’s current park naming policy.
Tentative Subdivision Map
The existing project site consists of nine parcels totaling approximately 136.1 acres. A Tentative Subdivision Map (TSM25-0006) is proposed to create 172 total lots consisting of 145 individual residential lots, two (2) common interest residential lots, 24 open space/fire buffer/utility/drainage/access lots, one (1) public park lot, dedicate additional city right-of-way, and establish 112 residential condominiums (cluster homes).
Conditional Use Permit
A Conditional Use Permit is included to allow for the temporary use of a rock crusher during grading. The use of an onsite rock crusher allows the project to process rock material for reuse as fill or base material for construction. The Conditional Use Permit contains conditions of approval to mitigate potential environmental impacts from the use of the rock crusher onsite, such as requirements for placement and limits on the time of use (7:00 am to 4:00 pm) and noise mitigation methods; such as, acoustic shielding, equipment mufflers, and berms. The crusher would be located in the central portion of the project site to provide the most distance from adjacent residential uses. Implementation of noise mitigation measures would reduce noise impacts to less than significant.
Environmental Review
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Environmental Impact Report (FEIR25-004/SCH No. 2025060511) (Attachment D) was prepared for the proposed project.
The City issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the project to solicit stakeholder feedback on the proposed DEIR from June 13, 2025, to July 14, 2025, and held a Public Scoping Meeting on June 26, 2025, to receive public input on the proposed project EIR.
As a result of the Notice of Preparation (NOP), the City received four comment letters from agencies and organizations: California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Department of Toxic Substances Control, and Native American Heritage Commission. Several letters were also received from nearby residents and the general public. Issues and concerns were primarily related to Aesthetics, Biological Resources, Cultural/Tribal Resources, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Land Use and Planning, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services, Transportation, Utilities and Service Systems, and Wildfire. The letters were considered when drafting the DEIR and are included in Appendix B2 of the EIR Technical Appendices (Attachment D).
The City circulated the DEIR for a forty-five-day (45) public review period from February 6, 2026, to March 23, 2026. A total of 39 written comment letters were received on the Draft EIR. Seven (7) of the comment letters came from the following agencies/organizations: California Department of Fish and Wildlife, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Caltrans, Pauma Band of Luiseño Indians, Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians, Twin Oaks Valley Community Sponsor Group, and Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility (SAFER). An additional 32 comments were received from residents within the area and the general public. Issues raised are mainly regarding the construction impacts, increase to population, increased traffic, emergency access and evacuation concerns, biological impacts, aesthetics, and noise impacts. A brief summary of the potentially significant environmental impacts and responses to some comments are included below. Detailed responses to comments are included in Section 0.3 of the Final Environmental Impact Report (Attachment D).
During the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) process, the City determined that implementation of the project would have no impact or a less than significant impact on multiple resource issue areas. Those resource areas include Aesthetics, Agriculture and Forestry Resources, Air Quality, Energy, Greenhouse Gas, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Utilities and Service Systems, and Wildfire.
Biological Resources
The project site contains special-status biological resources, including sensitive vegetation communities and suitable habitat for nesting birds and special-status wildlife species. The proposed project would impact 29.7 acres of Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub. The mitigation measures for the loss of Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub would be at a 1:1 ratio or as required by the Wildlife Agencies. The applicant can accomplish mitigation through on-site preservation, off-site preservation, purchase of mitigation credits, or any combination as approved by the Planning Director and the Wildlife Agencies. Additionally, approximately 52 acres of biological habitat area would be preserved and managed.
The project is conditioned to implement mitigation measures MM-BIO-1 through MM-BIO-7 which address construction work limits, construction worker education, biological construction monitoring, coastal California gnatcatcher protection, Crotch’s bumble bee protection, nesting birds protection, conservation of sensitive communities, preserve management, and aquatic resource compliance. These mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts on sensitive natural communities, and would ensure that the appropriate permits are obtained in accordance with United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), State Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and/or United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) requirements. Furthermore, although impacts would be less than significant, a project condition of approval has been added to minimize impacts to monarch butterfly at the request of CDFW. CDFW and USFWS also concurred with measuring the fuel modification zones identified in the Fire Protection Plan (Appendix L of Attachment D) from the structures instead of the property lines to minimize sensitive biological impacts. With implementation of mitigation measures MM-BIO-1 through MM-BIO-7, impacts to biological resources as a result of project implementation would be reduced to a level of less than significant.
Cultural/Tribal Cultural Resources
Implementation of the proposed project would not impact any identified archaeological resources, historical resources, or any known human remains interred outside a formal cemetery. However, the potential exists for impacts to previously unknown cultural resources resulting from implementation of the proposed project. Following Native American consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52 and Senate Bill 18, the City negotiated mitigation measures with consulting tribes to ensure identification and appropriate handling of potentially buried Tribal Cultural Resources (TCR) within the original project site. These potentially significant impacts to archaeological resources and human remains would be mitigated to below a level of significance through implementation of mitigation measures MM-CR-1a through MM-CR-1d. Specifically, implementation of mitigation measures MM-CR-1a through MM-CR-1b would provide for the presence of archaeological and Native American monitors during ground disturbing activities to identify any previously unidentified cultural resources and to prevent inadvertent disturbance of any intact cultural deposits that may be present. Should any resources be identified, implementation of mitigation measure MM-CR-1c would ensure proper handling and treatment of such resources by providing for evaluation by a qualified archaeologist, in consultation with a tribal monitor, to determine whether additional archaeological work is necessary. Potential impacts to human remains would be mitigated through implementation of mitigation measure MM-CR-1d which includes the requirement that any remains uncovered during ground disturbing activities shall not be further disturbed until the San Diego County Coroner has determined origins of the remains and final treatment has been coordinated with input of Native American Tribes as necessary. Furthermore, mitigation measures MM-TCR-1 through MM-TCR-3 were added as a result of comments received by the Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians which address site surveys, interpretive signage, and a native plant garden. With incorporation of these mitigation measures, potential impacts to cultural resources associated with the proposed project would be reduced to a less than significant level.
Geology and Soils
Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR, impacts associated with seismicity, liquefaction, landslides, erosion/loss of topsoil, compressible soils, and expansive soils were determined to be less than significant. Impacts to paleontological resources during project construction would be reduced to a level of less than significant with implementation of mitigation measure MM-GEO-1. The mitigation measure requires the applicant to retain a qualified paleontologist to identify areas where paleontological resources may be present and to monitor the initial cut in any areas that may have the potential to contain paleontological resources. If paleontological resources are encountered during grading or excavation, the qualified paleontologist will evaluate the discovery and, if determined to be scientifically significant, oversee appropriate recovery, documentation, and curation of the resource. Furthermore, the proposed project would be required to adhere to all recommendations in the preliminary geotechnical evaluation report. With mitigation measure MM-GEO-1, potential impacts during construction activities to paleontological resources would be reduced to a less than significant level.
Noise
The development of the project site would have noise impacts due to temporary construction activities (including blasting and vibration impacts), grading and rock crushing operations. The nearest sensitive receptors are the existing residential homes located adjacent to the northern and southern project boundaries. Prior to issuing a grading permit for blasting or rock crushing, the applicant would provide the final location of the construction equipment to the Planning Division for approval. If a rock drill is shown to be located within 160 feet from a sensitive land use’s property line, an acoustical engineer shall prepare a noise assessment to determine whether noise levels in excess of the 75 dBA standard would occur during construction. If the rock drilling noise assessment determines noise levels at the affected property lines would exceed 75 dBA, the acoustical engineer shall develop a mitigation plan to ensure rock drilling and blasting would be below 75 dBA at the property line including measures such as sound barriers or other feasible attenuation techniques. If a rock crusher is shown to be located within 400 feet of a single-family use without shielding, an acoustical engineer shall prepare a noise assessment to determine whether noise levels would be above the applied threshold of 60 dBA Leq for single-family residential use. Therefore, the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures would reduce noise from the rock drilling and rock crushing activities to less than significant. Furthermore, the Conditional Use Permit conditions require that all rock crushing activities meet the blasting requirements and process cited in SMMC Ch. 17.60 for a blasting permit, setback requirements from sensitive receptors, earthen berms, absorbing materials, shielding requirements, operational limits on crushing. Noise measurements shall be conducted once rock crushing is in operation to ensure compliance with City thresholds. In addition, all debris shall be disposed off-site in accordance with current local, state, and federal disposal requirements, and noticing to the City and all residences within 600 feet of any potential blast location shall be provided at the time of issuance of a building or grading permit.
Based on the noise analysis (Attachment D, Appendix P), the cumulative noise level from surrounding roadway would not exceed the exterior noise threshold of 60 dBA CNEL (Decibels measured at a Community Noise Equivalent Level) at the residential units’ ground floor private yards with the proposed 5’ wall at the top of the slope between the units on Lot X and N. Twin Oaks Valley Road. The units in Lot T are located further from the roadway and would be below the City’s 60 dBA CNEL noise threshold. Additionally, based on the noise analysis and supplemental noise analysis (Attachment D, Appendices P & U) noise levels at the proposed public park would be below the City’s 70 dBA CNEL noise threshold as measured at the adjacent property lines. Therefore, the proposed outdoor usage areas would comply with the City Noise Standard. In addition, the project would not create a noise increase of more than 3 dBA CNEL on any of the analyzed roadway segments. Therefore, the Project’s contributions to off-site roadway noise will not cause any significant impacts to any existing or future noise sensitive land uses.
Transportation (Vehicles Miles Traveled Analysis)
Per the City’s Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) guidelines, the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis screening threshold was evaluated for the residential project and a VMT analysis was required since the project is not located in a VMT efficient area. The project would be expected to generate 18.5 VMT/resident, which is 12.8% over the VMT threshold of 85% or less of the regional average. Implementation of quantifiable VMT reduction strategies such as providing EV chargers and pedestrian network improvements, would result in a total VMT reduction of 12.67% and a reduction of 12.8% is required to fully mitigate the project’s significant VMT impact. There are no additional measures applicable to the project to capture the remaining 0.13% VMT reduction. The project would implement other non-quantifiable measures strategies through implementation of the project’s Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan. Although these measures and strategies in the TDM plan would enhance non-vehicular mobility, they are not quantifiable and do not contribute to the overall VMT reduction. As such, the project’s VMT impact remains significant and unavoidable. Therefore, the proposal includes a request for a Statement of Overriding Considerations to be issued by the City upon approval of the project as detailed in Exhibit A - Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations of Resolution PC 26-5210.
Level of Service Analysis (Land Use and Planning)
Since Senate Bill 743 went into effect, analysis of traffic congestion based on the level of service (LOS) metric is not part of the CEQA impact assessment. However, the City requires a separate LOS-based traffic analysis to demonstrate that the project would maintain mobility performance goals outlined in the City’s General Plan (Mobility Policy M-1.4). As such, the LOS-based traffic study was submitted to the City under separate cover for review (Attachment D, Appendix O).
The traffic study anticipates the proposed project generating 2,393 average daily trips (ADT), including 194 AM peak hour trips and 239 PM peak hour trips. Seventeen (17) road segments and fourteen (14) intersections (including the project’s driveway entry) were analyzed in the traffic study. For Near-Term 2028 and Horizon Year 2050, all intersections and roadway segments analyzed are projected to operate at an acceptable LOS D or better with the exception of two intersections and two road segments.
The intersection of N. Twin Oaks Valley Road and Buena Creek Road for Horizon Year 2050, with and without project conditions, result in LOS F. The intersection of Twin Oaks Valley Road and San Marcos Boulevard for both Near Term 2028 and Horizon Year 2050, without and with project conditions, result in LOS F. The project causes more than 2.0 second delay to these intersections. Also, the road segments of Twin Oaks Valley Road from Buena Creek Road to Olive Street and from Olive Street to Cassou Road for the Near Term 2028, with and without project conditions, result in LOS F. Therefore, the project is required to optimize signal timing and coordination with adjacent signalized intersections along the Twin Oaks Valley Road corridor, including the signal at the project driveway.
The project will contribute toward City-wide traffic. In order to mitigate for potential cumulative impacts, the proposed project is conditioned to financially participate in the Congestion Management Community facilities district (CFD 2011-01), which will assist in City-wide efforts to reduce traffic congestion and impacts to State Route 78.
DEIR Alternatives
State CEQA Guidelines require that Environmental Impact Reports examine a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed project that would obtain the basic objectives of the project and would avoid or lessen environmental impacts. The DEIR prepared for the proposed Oakcrest Specific Plan project examined three alternatives: No Project Alternative; General Plan Compliance with Specific Plan Alternative; and Reduced Footprint Alternative. Four additional alternatives were considered but rejected including: Alternative Location, Reduced Density Alternative, 75% Avoidance Alternative, and Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub Avoidance Alternative. The 75% Avoidance Alternative, and Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub Avoidance Alternative were added in the Final EIR in response to comments received on the DEIR from the US Fish and Wildlife Service. All alternatives are detailed in Section 4 of the project FEIR (Attachment D).
The objectives of the proposed project are described as follows:
1. Provide a range of housing opportunities close to transit, education facilities, shopping opportunities, recreational uses, and trails to optimize land use with transit use and active modes of transportation, reduce reliance on automobiles, and potentially reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
2. Develop high quality single-family housing that is attractive to varying categories of homebuyers and supports the housing needs of the City and the region.
3. Provide the City with public park space.
4. Create a highly connected and efficient circulation system of pathways supported by pedestrian friendly architecture and landscaping to promote walkability and connectivity for people to access surrounding bicycle lanes, sidewalks, and trails.
5. Design a vehicular circulation system that adequately accommodates traffic and minimizes traffic impacts in and around each planning area.
6. Establish development standards and design guidelines that ensure distinctive architecture, landscaping and recreational amenities that complement and enhance the existing surrounding neighborhood while providing a desirable living environment for residents within the Specific Plan area.
7. Institute a program for the long-term maintenance of the community to ensure all facilities are adequately maintained to City standards.
8. Finance or contribute a fair share of funding to all community services and infrastructure needed to support development proposed by the Specific Plan to promote economic stability.
9. Respect the areas of the property within the Ridgeline Ordinance Zone, and maximize preservation of existing habitat.
No Project Alternative
Under the No Project/No Development Alternative, since the proposed project would not be implemented and not develop any new residential uses or public park would be developed on the project site, overall impacts would be less than those of the proposed project or eliminated entirely. However, some benefits of the proposed project would not be realized under this alternative, including the preservation of 52.59 acres within a biological open space easement, construction of a six-acre public park, and provision of additional housing units in the City which would help the City meet its RHNA goals. The No Project Alternative would not meet any of the project objectives.
General Plan Compliance with Specific Plan Alternative
The General Plan Compliance with Specific Plan Alternative considers development of the project site under the existing General Plan designations and assumes a Specific Plan would be prepared. The Specific Plan would allow for clustering of uses to preserve larger areas of biological open space. The General Plan Compliance with Specific Plan Alternative would result in fewer residential units (89 compared to 257), a larger public park (16 acres compared to 6 acres), and development of a 56-acre high school that could have approximately 2,585 students. The reduced number of residential units would generate less population growth resulting in reduced demand and level of impact for population and housing, public services, and recreation. Construction of the new school would provide an additional high school option for local students, and the larger public park would better meet community demand for recreational spaces. Water demand would decrease under this alternative. However, because this alternative includes a high school, trip generation would increase by about 103% compared to the proposed project (4,868 ADT compared to 2,393 ADT). This would result in a proportional increase in air pollutants, GHG emissions, fuel consumption, noise from vehicles, and transportation impacts, including VMT. The significant and unavoidable VMT impacts would remain under this alternative. Substantial effects related to roadway and intersection LOS would also be expected to increase. Operational energy use, sewer demand and solid waste generation would also be higher due to the high school. Construction-related air pollutants, GHG emissions, and fuel consumption are expected to be slightly higher because of additional worker and vendor trips for the high school, though grading, blasting, and rock crushing would be similar to the proposed project. Construction-related noise impacts due to rock drilling and crushing would be similar to the proposed project. Footprint-specific impacts, such as those related to agricultural resources, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils (including paleontological resources), hydrology and water quality, mineral resources, and tribal cultural resources would be similar to the proposed project, as the same extent of ground disturbance would occur.
The General Plan Compliance with Specific Plan Alternative would meet Objective 1 (provide a range of housing opportunities) and Objective 3 (provide public park space). It would also partially meet Objective 2 (develop high quality single-family housing). This alternative could also be designed in a manner to meet the remaining objectives: create a connected and efficient circulation system (Objective 4) and to create a circulation system that would accommodate traffic and minimize traffic impact (Objective 5), establish developments standards and design guidelines (Objective 6), institute a program for the long-term maintenance of the community (Objective 7), finance or contribute fair share funding to all community services (Objective 8), and respect the ROZ and preserve biological open space (Objective 9).
Reduced Footprint Alternative
The Reduced Footprint Alternative was designed to reduce the project’s impact to sensitive biological resources, including Diegan coastal sage scrub and special-status plant species. Impacts to Diegan coastal sage scrub would be reduced by approximately 8 acres under this alternative when compared to the proposed project. Compared to the proposed project, this alternative would result in a reduced level of biological resources impacts, however implementation of biological resources mitigation measures would still be required. Development would be eliminated north of the current northerly access road, which would reduce the development footprint by approximately 25 acres. The proposed residential units south of the access road would be similar to what is proposed under the proposed project. This would result in 196 residential units (115 single family units and 81 single-family cluster units). The 6-acre public park would not be developed under this alternative; however, it was assumed a biological open space easement would be incorporated to ensure long-term habitat preservation. Grading quantities would be less compared to the proposed project and it is anticipated that this alternative could still generally balance earthwork activities on the site. Rock drilling, blasting and rock crushing would still be required under this alternative. For the Reduced Footprint Alternative, footprint-specific impacts-- such as those related to biological resources, cultural resources, paleontological resources (geology and soils), hydrology and water quality, and tribal cultural resources-- would be reduced compared to the proposed project, as less ground disturbance would occur. The Reduced Footprint Alternative would result in a less intensive use of the project site by proposing 196 residential units rather than 257 units, and by eliminating the 6-acre public park. Trip generation would also be reduced (1,798 ADT compared to 2,393 ADT), leading to lower operational air pollutant emissions, GHG emissions, fuel consumption, and vehicle-related noise. Construction activity would still involve demolition, grading, blasting, and rock crushing, but with reduced grading quantities and fewer buildings, construction-related air pollutants, GHG emissions, and energy use would be proportionally lower. Construction-related noise from drilling and rock crushing would be similar to the proposed project. Impacts related to aesthetics, agriculture and forestry resources, hazards and hazardous materials, mineral resources, and wildfire would be similar to the proposed project. Public service demands would be lower because of 61 fewer residential units and approximately 181 fewer residents, resulting in decreased demand for schools, parks, libraries, and police and fire protection. Utilities and service systems demands, including water, wastewater, and solid waste generation, would also be reduced compared to the proposed project. Overall, the Reduced Footprint Alternative would reduce many environmental impacts relative to the proposed project though it would not provide a public park, nor would it maximize the ability for the City to meet its RHNA allocation. The significant and unavoidable VMT impacts would remain under this alternative.
The Reduced Footprint Alternative would meet Objective 1 (provide a range of housing opportunities) and would also partially meet Objective 2 (develop high quality single-family housing). This alternative would not meet Objective 3 (provide public park space). This alternative could also be designed in a manner to meet the remaining objectives: create a connected and efficient circulation system (Objective 4) and to create a circulation system that would accommodate traffic and minimize traffic impact (Objective 5), establish developments standards and design guidelines (Objective 6), (institute a program for the long-term maintenance of the community (Objective 7), finance or contribute fair share funding to all community services (Objective 8) and respect the ROZ and preserve biological open space (Objective 9).
Alternative Location
Pursuant to Section 15126.6(f)(2) of the CEQA Guidelines, the City considered the potential for alternative locations to the project. There are no sites within the city of an approximately equivalent size to the project site that could be redeveloped with a residential project. Even if there were sites, the project applicant does not control another site within the city of comparable land area that is available for development of the proposed project. One of the factors for feasibility of an alternative is “whether the proponent can reasonably acquire, control or otherwise have access to the alternative sites.” Because the City is highly urbanized and is largely built out, obtaining another site of a similar size in a similar location is not considered feasible. It should also be noted that the project site is surrounded by existing development to the north, south and east and located adjacent to transportation facilities and utility infrastructure. Further, the site has been identified for development, as evidenced by the Rural Residential (RR) and Agricultural/Residential (AG) designations on the project site, as well as the School (S) and Public Park (P) designators which would allow for a school and public park to be built on the site. As such, an alternative location was ultimately rejected from further analysis in the EIR.
Reduced Density Alternative
A Reduced Density Alternative was considered to reflect a scenario where the substantial LOS effects at two intersections and two roadway segments were reduced to less than significant. Based upon information provided by the project’s traffic consultant, a maximum of 285 ADT could be realized before a substantial effect related to LOS would occur. Therefore, the Reduced Density Alternative assumes a 28-unit residential subdivision would be developed under a Specific Plan. No public park or biological open space preserve would be proposed under this scenario. The residential units would be dispersed across the project site, and this alternative would be designed to comply with the City’s Ridgeline Protection Ordinance. The development footprint under this alternative could cover up to 83 acres. This alternative was not further analyzed as it would not meet several project objectives. Specifically, it would not provide for a range of housing opportunities (Objective 1), it would not provide the City with a public park (Objective 3), and it is unlikely this alternative would be able to finance or contribute a fair share of infrastructure funding (Objective 8) due to the substantially reduced number of residential units developed.
75% Avoidance Alternative
During public review of the Draft EIR, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) requested the addition of a project alternative that would reduce impacts to 25% of the project site by focusing development along Twin Oaks Valley Road and eliminating development in the western portion of the project site to achieve conservation goals and minimize edge effects and fragmentation, as described in the City’s Draft Subarea Plan. Given the project site is 136.1 acres, reducing impacts to 25% of the site would result in an approximately 34-acre development area. The remaining acreage (102 acres) would be placed within a biological open space easement. The 34 acres identified for development would also need to include a fire fuel modification buffer which further reduces the available footprint for residential development. It is unlikely that a 6-acre public park could be accommodated under this scenario due to the footprint for potential development. Therefore, this alternative was not further analyzed as it would not meet several project objectives. Specifically, it would not provide for a range of housing opportunities (Objective 1), it would not provide the City with a public park (Objective 3), nor would it be likely that this alternative would be able to finance or contribute its fair share of funding (Objective 8).
Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub Avoidance Alternative
During public review of the Draft EIR, USFWS also requested the addition of a project alternative that would avoid all Diegan coastal sage scrub on the project site and concentrate development in the eastern portion of the project site. Based upon the biological resources technical report prepared for the project (Bargas 2026), there are 84.7 acres of Diegan coastal sage scrub on the project site. As shown in Figure 3.4-2, the Diegan coastal sage scrub is concentrated in the western and southern portion of the project site with additional patches in the northern portion of the site. Avoidance of all Diegan coastal sage scrub on the project site would result in approximately 51 acres being available for development. However, due to the interspersed patches of Diegan coastal sage scrub, which leaves portions of the site broken up, the likely development area under this scenario would be approximately 33 acres. The remaining acreage would be placed within a biological open space easement. The 33 acres would also need to include a fire fuel modification buffer which further reduces the available footprint for residential development. It is unlikely that a 6-acre public park could be accommodated under this scenario, due to the footprint for potential development. Therefore, this alternative was not further analyzed as it would not meet several project objectives. Specifically, it would not provide for a range of housing opportunities (Objective 1), it would not provide the City with a public park (Objective 3), nor would be likely that this alternative would be able to be financed or contribute to a fair share of funding (Objective 8).
Environmentally Superior Alternative
Among the other alternatives, not including the proposed project, the Reduced Footprint Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative because it would provide a reduced level of impact in some environmental analysis areas including air quality, energy, noise, public services, and utilities/service systems. Mitigation measures would still be required to mitigate impacts to biological resources, cultural resources/tribal cultural resources, geology and soils, and noise. However, the Reduced Density Alternative would still have significant and unmitigated transportation (VMT) impacts, and it would not provide a public park.
DEIR Public Comments
California Department of Fish and Wildlife: The letter provides various comments on the proposed project, mainly in relation to the project impacts on sensitive habitat on-site and suggests updated mitigation measures to reduce impacts. The Final EIR provides a detailed response to the comments and has included additional information, project design features, and/or minor mitigation measure modifications related to monarch butterfly, white-tailed kite, and Crotch’s bumble bee to address several of the comments from the wildlife agency.
US Department of Fish and Wildlife Service: The letter provides various comments on the proposed project, mainly in relation to the project impacts on the sensitive habitat on-site and suggests that two alternatives be considered that reduce impacts to no more than 25 percent by focusing development along Twin Oaks Valley Road and an alternative that avoids coastal sage scrub in the western portion of the project site to better achieve conservation goals. The letter also states that the project is not consistent with the Multiple Habitat Conservation Program (MHCP) and the City’s draft MHCP Subarea Plan. Additional conservation measures are also recommended to be added to avoid, minimize, and mitigate potential impacts to the gnatcatcher and its critical habitat. The Final EIR provides a detailed response to the comments and has added discussion on two suggested project alternatives as well as additional information, project design features, and/or minor mitigation measure modifications related to sensitive species to address the comments from the wildlife agency.
California Department of Transportation: The letter comments on topics such as performing a local development safety review for the project, complete streets, mobility and smart growth. The Final EIR provides a detailed response to the comments which includes clarification that there is no nexus or need for a safety review for the project, that the project will improve pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure along the project frontage to enhance multimodal travel in the project vicinity, and verification that the project does not propose any development or improvements within the Caltrans right-of-way.
Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians: The letter comments on topics such as the pre-excavation agreement, construction monitoring, unanticipated discovery procedures, pedestrian survey, interpretive signage, and a native plant garden. The Final EIR provides a detailed response to the comments and has made minor revisions to and additions to the cultural and tribal cultural mitigation measures including the addition of interpretive signage and a native plant garden, to address some of the comments from the tribe.
Twin Oaks Valley Community Sponsor Group: The letter provides comments on wildlife movement, outdoor lighting, and traffic. The Final EIR provides a detailed response to the comments and no modifications to the DEIR were made as a result of the comments provided.
Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility (SAFER): A letter provided by Lozeau Drury, LLP, on behalf of SAFER, states that the Draft EIR fails as an informational document and fails to implement all feasible mitigation measures to reduce the project’s impacts, and requests that the DEIR be revised and recirculated. The Final EIR provides a response to the comments which includes that the comments do not raise any specific issues related to specific topics or mitigation measures in the Draft EIR that they believe are not adequately addressed. As discussed in the Draft EIR, all potentially significant impacts are mitigated to less-than-significant levels with the exception of transportation-related impacts related to vehicle miles traveled (VMT). No further response is required since the comment does not raise an issue related to the adequacy of any specific section or analysis of physical environmental impacts in the Draft EIR.
Individuals (32): Comment letters were received by 32 residents and interested parties, mainly expressing concerns on project density, open space preservation, traffic, and wildfire/evacuation.
Response - Density: Much of the site is designated Rural Residential (RR) which allows single-family residences with a density up to 2 dwelling units per acre (du/ac). A smaller portion of the site has a designation of Agriculture/Residential (AG) which allows single-family residential development at up to 1.0 du/ac based on location and slope. Density is calculated based on gross site acreage, before any required land dedication. As designed, the project would result in a gross density of 1.89 dwelling units du/ac and a net density of 3.88 du/ac. The proposed Oakcrest Specific Plan would allow a gross density up to 2.0 du/ac, not to exceed 257 dwelling units. The proposed density is consistent with surrounding development that is permitted at up to 2.0 dwelling units per gross acre. The density is also comparable to the existing density allowances for the site prior to approval and implementation of the Oakcrest Specific Plan.
Response - Open Space Preservation: The project has been designed to minimize impacts to existing ridgelines identified by the Ridgeline Protection and Management Overlay Zone. Development is proposed on approximately 84 acres (including homes, streets, recreational open space, landscaped areas, and drainage structures), with approximately 52 acres (38%) preserved and maintained as biological open space. This biological open space would add to the preserved open space in the project vicinity to create a large block of high-quality habitat and would contribute to the Biological Core and Linkage Area west of the project site. Under current conditions, there is no long-term habitat preservation and management in place. The biological open space would be managed in perpetuity and would provide habitat benefits for sensitive biological resources and an aesthetics benefit by preserving the higher elevation and more visible portions of the project site.
Response - Traffic: The project has evaluated Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) for compliance with CEQA and as discussed in the Transportation section, would require Overriding Considerations to be approved by the City since there are no additional quantifiable measures to reduce VMT below the significance threshold. Level of Service (LOS) was evaluated for compliance with City General Plan policies and the project is conditioned to conduct a corridor signal optimization plan and implement the results for the Twin Oaks Valley Road corridor between Buena Creek Road and San Marcos Boulevard. With implementation of this condition, operations are calculated to generally improve delay, travel time and speed better than in the project pre-project condition with the implementation of signal optimization and coordination.
Response - Wildfire/Evacuation: The project’s Fire Protection Plan (FPP) evaluated site conditions, including vegetation, topography, fire behavior, emergency response, and evacuation capability. Based on fire behavior modeling and project design features, the FPP determined that the project would represent a low to moderate wildfire risk to occupants once constructed based on the project’s fire protection design features and its ability to provide for evacuations and contingency on-site shelter in place. The FPP analysis determined that wildfire behavior on the site would be reduced under the developed condition compared to existing conditions since development would convert portions of wildland fuels into managed landscapes with fuel modification areas and improved access for firefighting resources. Modeling concluded that flame length, fireline intensity, and spread rate would decrease over current conditions once the project is constructed. In addition, implementation of enhanced construction standards and defensible space requirements would reduce vulnerability to wildfire and assist firefighters in defending structures. Additionally, on-site utilities would be undergrounded, which eliminates the potential ignition sources associated with overhead lines and the site would be designed for improved access for firefighting personnel and equipment throughout the site. Collectively, these measures would reduce wildfire risk compared to the existing undeveloped condition and assist firefighters in protecting structures and surrounding areas.
Detailed responses to all comments received during the public review period of the Draft EIR have been provided in Section 0.3 of the Final EIR (Attachment D).
Public Comment
The City conducted a noticed public information meeting held on August 27, 2025. Approximately 75 members of the public attended the meeting and verbal comments were received in addition to written comment cards. Meeting notes, draft responses, and comment cards are attached as Attachment F. Approximately 60 additional written comments were received from members of the public during the project review and are attached as Attachment G. Attachment G also includes one response to group comments received June 18, 2026. Many of these are repeat comments that were received during the DEIR public review period which ran from February 6, 2026, to March 23, 2026. Responses are included in Section 0.3 the Final EIR (Attachment D).
Attachment(s)
Resolutions:
1. Resolution PC 26-5210 (EIR25-004): Recommend to City Council certification of the project Environmental Impact Report;
2. Resolution PC 26-5203 (GPA25-0005): Recommend to City Council approval of a land use designation amendment for the project site from Rural Residential (RR) / Agricultural/Residential (AG) to Specific Plan Area (SPA);
3. Resolution PC 26-5204 (R25-0004): Recommend to City Council approval of a zone reclassification for the project site from Estate (R-1-20) / Agriculture 1 (A-1) to Specific Plan Area (SPA);
4. Resolution PC 26-5205 (SP25-0004): Recommend to City Council adoption of the Oakcrest Specific Plan to establish development guidelines and serve as the primary land use, policy, and regulatory document for the project site;
5. Resolution PC 26-5206 (SDP25-0002): Recommend to City Council approval of a Site Development Plan to allow the construction of 257 single-family homes and associated improvements and amenities;
6. Resolution PC 26-5207 (SDP25-0003): Recommend to City Council approval of a Site Development Plan to allow the construction of a 6.2-acre public park;
7. Resolution PC 26-5208 (TSM25-0006): Recommend to City Council approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map to establish 147 residential lots, 24 open space/fire buffer/utility/drainage/access lots, one (1) public park lot, and 112 residential condominiums; and
8. Resolution PC 26-5209 (CUP25-0001): Recommend to City Council approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow the temporary use of a rock crusher during grading operations.
A. Vicinity Map
B. Requested Entitlements
C. Site & Project Characteristics
D. Environmental Impact Report (EIR25-004)
E. Project Plans
F. Public Information Meeting Notes
G. Public Comments
Prepared by: Chris Garcia, Principal Planner
Reviewed by: Kyrenne Chua, Principal Civil Engineer
Submitted by: Joseph Farace, Planning Division Director