1 of 5 August 18, 2026, Item #8
M EMQRAN DLJ M City of Poway
ADDITIONAL MATERIALS
(Agenda Related Writings/Documents provided to City Council or Staff after distribution of the Agenda Packet for the August 18, 2026 Regular City Council Meeting) DATE:
TO:
FROM:
CONTACT:
SUBJECT:
August 18, 2026
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
Carrie Gallagher, City Clerk ~
(858) 668-4535 or [email protected]
Item 8 -Pre-Development Conference 26-0001, a Proposal for 42-Townhomes and Mixed-Use Development, Phase 2 of the Poway Commons Project at 13027 Poway Road, APNs 317-472-02, 317-472-38 and 317-472-39
Attached please find correspondence received after the agenda posting deadline. roved By:
Trac ens
Assistant City Manager
Reviewed By:
Alan Fenstermacher
City Attorney
2 of 5 August 18, 2026, Item #8
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Lisa oumolt
~
Written Comments for Item #8 -PDC 26-0001 (Tonight"s Council Meeting, August 18, 2026) Monday, August 17, 2026 2:48:39 PM
PDC26-0001 Comment Letter DuMolt.pdf
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Lea rn why this is important EXTE:R AL EMAIL
Dear City Clerk,
Please find attached my written comments on Item #8, PDC 26-0001 (Poway Commons Phase 2, 13027 Poway Road), for tonight's City Council meeting.
I would like these comments entered into the record and distributed to the Mayor and Council members prior to consideration of this item. I also plan to speak during public comment on this item.
Given the timing, I would appreciate confirmation that this has been received.
Thank you,
Lisa DuMolt
District 3 Resident
3 of 5 August 18, 2026, Item #8
Lisa DuMolt
District 3, City of Poway
August 18, 2026
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
City of Poway
RE: ITEM #8 -PDC 26-0001, POWAY COMMONS PHASE 2 (13027 POWAY ROAD) Dear Mayor Vaus and Members of the Council:
I support this project. I am asking the Council to attach the following conditions before any superior design finding is made.
REQUESTED COUNCIL DIRECTION
1. MAKE STAFF'S DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS REQUIREMENTS, NOT SUGGESTIONS.
Setback variation, roofline breaks at 50-foot intervals, and transitional massing toward adjacent single-story homes.
2. REQUIRE COMPLETE ELEVATIONS FOR ALL BUILDINGS BEFORE ANY SUPERIOR DESIGN FINDING.
Including buildings that do not front Poway Road, for which no elevations have been prepared.
3. WITHHOLD SUPPORT FOR THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENTS UNTIL THE DESIGN RECORD IS COMPLETE.
The adjustments to commercial depth and ceiling height, and the Tier 1 height incentive, all rest on that finding.
4. REQUIRE THE 12-FOOT PEDESTRIAN PASSAGEWAY CLEARANCE TO BE DIMENSIONED AND VERIFIED.
Not conceptually indicated. This passageway is the one element the staff report expressly identifies as a significant community benefit.
5. REQUIRE COMMERCIAL SPACES TO BE DELIVERED MOVE-IN READY.
Finished, with grease interceptors for food uses and designated commercial parking -not as cold shells.
6. CLARIFY HOW MUCH COMMERCIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE IS LEASABLE INTERIOR SPACE.
As distinct from patio and setback area counted toward the target.
SUPPORTING DISCUSSION
Design record. Completing this catalytic site with a genuine mixed-use development is the right outcome for Poway Road, and the density and setback figures are well within PRSP standards. My concern is repeating the outcome of Poway Commons Phase I. The staff report itself flags this risk: it describes the current design as producing a 335-foot building "wall" along Poway Road, with a maximum setback variation of only three feet. Staff's recommended enhancements are exactly the commitments that would prevent that outcome -but they are recommendations, not requirements. Elevations have not been prepared for the buildings that do not front Poway Road, and the submitted side elevation does not show the stepbacks the PRSP requires. A superior design finding should not be made on an incomplete design record.
Pedestrian passageway. The passageway to Community Park deserves particular attention, because it is the one element in this submittal the staff report expressly identifies as a significant community benefit. It is doing real work in the superior design argument. Yet it is also the least documented feature in the package. The conceptual site plan dimensions the 88-foot retail frontage span and the required setbacks precisely, but assigns no dimension at all to the passageway.
What the drawing shows is a landscaped route running alongside parking that serves the townhome buildings -not a demonstrated 12-foot unobstructed clearance free of parking and drive aisle conflicts. A benefit that has not been measured cannot yet be credited. I am not asking for construction-level detail at the conceptual stage; I am asking that this clearance be dimensioned and verified before any superior design finding rests on it.
4 of 5 August 18, 2026, Item #8
Commercial program. The applicant's summary reports 10,500 square feet of commercial space that expressly includes adjacent patio areas, and the staff report's own footnote notes that the calculated area includes the setback as commercially supportive space. At the same time, the project requests reductions to the interior dimensions -depth to as little as 32 feet and ceiling heights to 11 feet -that determine whether a space can actually be leased and occupied. Meeting a square footage target partly with outdoor area while reducing the interior dimensions of the space itself warrants examination before the Council treats the commercial program as satisfying the Town Center vision. Phase I's commercial space has struggled to lease and activate; delivered-but-unfinished space may be part of why, independent of any dimensional standard.
Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully,
Lisa DuMolt
District 3 Resident
5 of 5 August 18, 2026, Item #8
From: Michael Yee
Julie Procopio To:
Subject: Aug 18 item 8 -Pre-Development Conference 26-0001 comment Monday, August 17, 2026 2:53:56 PM Date:
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important E 'TER.!"'\J J:'.fVI IL
Hello Ms. Procopio,
Can you confirm this is received within the 3 pm requirement for pre-meeting comment? This is a comment about item 8 on the August 18, 2026 agenda:
Pre-Development Conference 26-0001, a Proposal for 42-Townhomes and Mixed-Use Development, Phase 2 of the Poway Commons Project at 13027 Poway Road, APNs 317-472- 02, 317-472-38 and 317-472-39
As a 32-year resident of Poway, I want to support the Poway Road Specific Plan and its development standards as a walkable and bikeable neighborhood in central Poway, especially with the reduced need for retail commercial space due to e-commerce and that supports new housing in Poway.
My concern has been Poway Road development needs to offer options for smooth pedestrian use and biking access so that car travel is not always required. I support these elements:
• Public Access Easement to Poway community park, that emulate the low speed interior road in the PRSP.
• Offers alternatives for east west biking access parallel to Poway Road • Offers opportunity for new residents to substitute a car for a bike, thereby reducing traffic even marginally
• Access to the west must be extended to allow for residents of Fairfield housing complex to access Community Park without having to drive on Poway Road. This means the parcel to the west must allow connectivity.
I may have additional comments to share in person at the City Council meeting.
Thank you for accepting these comments.
Michael
Michael Yee