San Marcos council certifies EIR, approves Woodward 46 plan for 46 condominiums

The San Marcos City Council on Tuesday certified an environmental impact report and approved a suite of entitlements needed for Woodward 46, a 46-unit townhome-style condominium project on an 8.6-acre vacant site along Woodward Street.

The project, proposed by Cornerstone Communities, will build 46 three-story townhomes, provide 108 parking spaces (92 in two-car garages and 16 guest spaces), and set aside steep-slope areas as open space. Council members unanimously adopted the resolutions and introduced ordinances required to amend the General Plan and the Heart of the City Specific Plan, certify EIR 23-005 and approve the multifamily site development plan, tentative subdivision map and a conditional use permit for temporary use of a rock crusher for grading operations.

The approvals follow a staff presentation that said the site is about 520 feet from the San Marcos Sprinter station and is intended to place housing near high-quality transit. "The project adds available housing to the city's inventory that is in compliance with the city's policies and is consistent with the development in the area," Scott Nightingale, principal planner, told the council.

Staff and the applicant described the project as 23 duplex-style buildings totaling 46 condominium units, with private yards, roof decks and shared amenities including a tot lot, a sensory garden, picnic and gathering areas, and a small bike/trike path for children. Building heights will be up to 45 feet and retaining walls are shown in plans at varying heights up to a maximum of 23 feet.

Nightingale and staff briefed the council on the environmental review process: a public scoping meeting and workshop in August 2023, a 45-day public review for the draft EIR from March 21 to May 5, and seven comment letters received during the review period. Agencies that submitted comments included the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the California Public Utilities Commission; neighbors raised concerns about grading, construction impacts and traffic. "The EIR concluded that the areas of impact would be mitigated to a less than significant" level with identified mitigation measures for biological, cultural and noise impacts, Nightingale said.

Engineering and traffic analysis presented at the hearing estimated the project would generate about 368 average daily trips, with 29 AM and 37 PM peak-hour trips, and would not add more than two seconds of delay to nearby intersections. Kyrene Chua, staff engineer, noted the project qualified for a CEQA vehicle-miles-traveled exemption because it is adjacent to high-quality transit.

Several neighbors had asked about a large engineered retaining wall shared with an adjacent subdivision (Mission Villas) and whether grading could require rock crushing or blasting. Matt Simmons, the applicant's representative, said rock crushing or blasting is not presumed but could be required if crews encounter large boulders during grading; in that case the project would follow the conditional use permit process and the required safety, notification and survey protocols. "We're required to notice anybody within 600 feet of that blasting," Simmons said, and structures within 300 feet would be video-surveyed pre- and post-construction.

Staff recommended, and the Planning Commission had earlier recommended by a 6-0 vote, certification of the final EIR and approval of the entitlements. Council members praised the project’s proximity to transit, family-friendly unit sizes and the inclusion of garage parking and EV prewiring. Mayor Jones described it as "an impressive neighborhood that's gonna provide a housing product that is large enough for small families to get into for the first time."

The council adopted the resolutions and ordinances by unanimous vote. Conditions of approval require biological mitigation (on- and off-site preservation and mitigation credit purchase), cultural resources monitoring and partial preservation or burial of identified resources, noise analyses and, if warranted, installation of sound barriers for construction equipment, and pre- and post-construction inspections tied to any blasting or crushing activities.

The developer and city will need to secure any required wildlife permits (staff noted a Section 10-type process with wildlife agencies), finalize engineering and construction drawings and satisfy the mitigation monitoring and reporting program before construction grading can begin. Staff and the applicant estimated that, if permitted and sequenced, grading activity could be roughly 12–18 months away as environmental permits and final engineering are completed.