Zoning Administrator Sally Shiffman approved a precise plan modification and administrative adjustment Wednesday for an 850‑square‑foot Bloom Energy fuel‑cell enclosure at 1441 Monteil Road, adopting conditions and Zoning Administrator Resolution 2025‑12.

Alex Rangel, associate planner for the city, told the hearing the project (case numbers PL250048 and PL250049) would support an existing T‑Mobile cellular switching facility by generating supplemental power using natural gas. The enclosure would be a 12.5‑foot by 33‑foot outdoor structure screened with new CMU walls. Rangel said the proposal requires removal of seven parking spaces to accommodate the enclosure and includes a request to memorialize eight existing reduced spaces under the site’s reciprocal parking agreement.

The staff report concluded the project is consistent with the Monteil Road master plan and Escondido’s municipal code and complies with the city’s development standards under Article 61 and off‑street parking rules under Article 39. Rangel told the zoning administrator that the site’s reciprocal parking agreement, which allocates shared parking by percentage, and the remaining 212 spaces meet the city’s parking criteria for the independent uses on the property.

A representative for North Coast Church, Jamie Looney, said he had learned of the proposal only hours before the hearing and asked whether the acoustic study had modeled noise impacts on the North Coast building as well as the adjacent industrial parcel. He also asked whether shared fire services and backflow would be affected. An applicant representative and project engineer Rodrigo Padua said Bloom Energy fuel‑cell systems are quieter than diesel generators and noted that acoustic and emissions reports were prepared; Padua offered to obtain additional manufacturer data if needed. City staff and the fire department said they had independently reviewed fire‑flow and utilities and had no concerns or required upgrades.

Staff emphasized that the noise modeling designated sensitive receptors (residential units to the north) and that the closest industrial property to the east is actually nearer to the proposed enclosure than the North Coast structure; modeling results, staff said, fell below the city’s noise thresholds.

Shiffman cited staff analysis and the conditions of approval and stated, “this item is approved,” invoking Article 61 authority. No roll‑call vote was recorded; the approval was made by the zoning administrator’s adoption of the resolution.

Next steps: the approval was adopted with conditions outlined in the staff report; the record indicates the project will proceed under the adopted conditions and any required permits prior to construction.