Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission approves final map for Bertech mixed‑use project after neighbor raises alley and utility concerns
Summary
The Encinitas Planning Commission approved a ministerial final map to consolidate lots and create 16 residential and two commercial condominium units at 102 and 118 2nd Street, approving staff’s finding that the map is technically correct; a nearby resident asked about alley access, parking and burying power poles, and the applicant said undergrounding is planned pending SDG&E approval.
The Encinitas Planning Commission voted to approve the final map for a mixed‑use project at 102 and 118 2nd Street, consolidating the existing lots into a single parcel and establishing 16 residential condominium units and two commercial condominium units.
Planner Eric Zilki told commissioners the final map is ministerial, ‘‘technically correct’’ and substantially consistent with the earlier tentative map and applicable state law and city requirements. He said final maps record definitive lot lines for county assessor records and that staff’s review confirmed required conditions have been met.
During public comment, Karen Whitman, who said her property backs onto the alley behind the site, asked how the project would affect alley access and parking and whether overhead power poles would be buried and removed. ‘‘We’re concerned about alley access and parking,’’ Whitman said, asking how garage access off the alley would be mitigated and whether utility poles would be undergrounded.
Applicant Dominic Bertekch responded that he has been meeting with SDG&E and ‘‘our goal is to put those power poles down’’ but that undergrounding depends on the utility’s approval. He also said the project includes parking garages accessed from the alley and that he intends to manage ownership and parking to avoid spillover onto the alley.
Commissioners asked clarifying questions about the phrase ‘‘commercial condominium units’’ and staff confirmed those two units are intended for businesses (staff cited a proposed winery as an example) and explained that condominium mapping allows the units to be sold rather than only rented. When commissioners asked whether the final map is ‘‘the same’’ as the tentative map, staff said the final map is substantively the same and that the tentative‑map process previously addressed site preparation and project conditions.
After brief deliberation the commission approved the final map; the transcript records the motion and a second (Bridget seconded), and the motion carried. The record does not show a roll‑call tally in the webcast transcript.
The resident was told staff would follow up with documentary references and the project planner and that many design and site issues had been established during the tentative‑map review and therefore are not reversible at the final‑map ministerial stage. The applicant repeated his commitment to pursue undergrounding with SDG&E and to manage parking for the development.
The commission closed public comment and moved on to other agenda business.
