Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCDP 01-13; Goetz Residence; Coastal Development Permit (CDP) (3)City of Carlsbad Planning Department January 29, 2002 Roy Asaro P 0 Box 8543 Rancho Santa Fe Ca 92064 SUBJECT:CDP 1-13 - GOETZ RESIDENCE The preliminary staff report for the above referenced project will be mailed to you on Friday, February 1, 2002. This preliminary report will be discussed by staff at the Development Coordinating Committee (DCC) meeting which will be held on February 11, 2002. A twenty (20) minute appointment has been set aside for you at 10:00. If you have any questions concerning your project you should attend the DCC meeting. It is necessary that you bring your required unmounted colored exhibit(s) with you to this meeting in order for your project to go forward to the Planning Commission. Your colored exhibits must be submitted at this time to ensure review by the Planning Commission at their briefings. If the colored exhibits are not available for their review, your project could be rescheduled to a later time. If you do not plan to attend this meeting, please make arrangements to have your colored exhibit(s) here by the scheduled time above. If you need additional information concerning Planner, Greg Fisher at (760) 602-4629. CITY OF CARLSBAD this matter, please contact your JARY'E. WAYNJ Assistant Planning Director GEW:GF:cs c: Dean & Barbara Goetz, 603 N Highway 101, Ste H, Solana Beach CA 92075 File Copy 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us CITY OF CARLSBAD ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT LAND USE REVIEW November 20, 2001 TO: Greg Fisher - Assistant Planner FROM: David Rick - Assistant Engineer COMPLETENESS REVIEW -3 ' 1 : PROJECT ID: CDP 01-13 GOETZ RESIDENCE The Engineering Department has completed its review of ther above referenced project for compliance with the previously determined issues. The project appears to comply with City engineering standards and all issues have been addressed. Please add the following conditions of approval to the approving resolution or letter: NOTE: Unless specifically stated in the condition, all of the following conditions, upon the approval of this proposed tentative map, must be met prior to approval of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first. General .; 1. Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from any proposed construction site within this project, Developer shall apply for and obtain approval from, the City Engineer for the proposed haul route. 2. Prior to issuance of any building permit, Developer shall comply with the requirements of the City's anti-graffiti program for wall treatments if and when such a program is formally established by the City. Fees/Agreements 3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any structures, the developer shall cause property owner to enter into an encroachment agreement with the City for the existing non-standardized concrete curb located within the public right-of- way. Grading 4. Based upon a review of the proposed grading and the grading quantities shown on the site plan, a grading permit for this project is required. Developer shall apply for and obtain a grading permit from the City Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit for the project. H:\LIBRARY\ENG\WPDATAWIISC\COMPREV Coastal 5. If a Grading Permit is required, all grading activities shall be planned in units that can be completed by October 1st. Grading activities shall be limited to the "dry season", April 1st to October 1st of each year. Grading activities may be extended to November 15th upon written approval of the City Engineer, obtained in advance, and only if all erosion control measures are in place by October 1st. Carlsbad Municipal Water District 6. Prior to issuance of building permits, Developer shall pay all fees, deposits, and charges for connection to public facilities. Developer shall pay the San Diego County Water Authority capacity charge(s) prior to issuance of Building Permits. 7. The Developer shall install the potable water service and meter at a location approved by the District Engineer. The locations of said services shall be reflected on public improvement plans. 8. The Developer shall install a sewer lateral and clean-out at a location approved by the District Engineer. The locations of the sewer lateral shall be reflected on the public improvement plans. 9. This project is approved upon the express condition that building permits will not be issued for the development of the subject property, unless the District Engineer has determined that adequate water and sewer facilities are available at the time of occupancy. If you or the applicant has any questions regarding the above, please either see or call me at 602- 2781. David Rick Assistant Engineer - Development Services Division H:\LIBRARY\ENG\WPDATA\MISC\COMPREV City of Carlsbad Planning Department August 10, 2001 Roy Asaro PO Box 8543 Rancho Santa Fe, Ca 92064 SUBJECT: CDP 01-13 - GOETZ RESIDENCE The items requested from you earlier to make your Coastal Development Permit, application no. CDP 01-13 complete have been received and reviewed by the Planning Department. It has been determined that the application is now complete for processing. Although the initial processing of your application may have already begun, the technical acceptance date is acknowledged by the date of this communication. Please note that although the application is now considered complete, there may be issues that could be discovered during project review and/or environmental review. Any issues should be resolved prior to scheduling the project for public hearing. In addition, the City may request, in the course of processing the application, that you clarify, amplify, correct, or otherwise, supplement the basic information required for the application. Please contact your staff planner, Greg Fisher, at (760) 602-4629, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincerely, MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director MJH:GF:cs c: Chris DeCerbo David Rick File Copy Data Entry Planning Aide 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us LIST OF ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION No. CDP 01-13 - GOETZ RESIDENCE Planning: None Engineering: None ISSUES OF CONCERN Planning: 1. The proposed wall located along the northern property line exceeds the maximum height of six feet. Please correct to meet the allowed height limit. 2. The base of the spiral staircase located in the rear yard is not permitted in the 45- foot bluff setback. Please redesign the staircase to meet this standard and show the new location on the site plan and elevation drawings. 3. As a reminder, the roofing material (sheet metal) must be administratively approved by the Planning Director. Your Coastal Development Permit will not be scheduled for Planning Commission hearing date until this occurs. Engineering: 1. Revise the grading plan to be consistent with the revisions to the driveway shown on the site plan. Additional concrete surface was added on the site plan to accommodate vehicle back-up but the same revisions were not made on the grading plan. 2. Since the sewer main is deep enough to accommodate gravity flow for the lowest floor level, remove Note 1 on sheet 2 of the grading plan. Add a note stating that "all on-site sewage will gravity flow to the main". 3. On the landscape plan, remove the decorative concrete from the portion of the driveway within the public right-of-way. This portion must be constructed of asphalt concrete or other easily removable material. Also, remove planters from the portion of driveway that was expanded to accommodate maneuvering of vehicles. 4. Where is the 50 feet of fill, as indicated on Sheet 1 of the grading plans, proposed? It appears that all grading consists of cut only. 5. The base of the spiral staircase located in the rear yard is not permitted within the 45-foot setback. They are shown removed from the grading plan but not the site plan or elevation plans. In addition, show the 45-foot bluff setback line and drainage easement on the landscape plan. Remove any shrubs, trees or hardscape from the easement and west of the easement. Landscaping with irrigation and hardscape in this portion of the lot would increase the amount of runoff over the bluff edge. Drainage over the bluff is prohibited beyond natural conditions. 6. A grading permit will be required. The grading plan check process takes approximately 3 months to complete and cannot begin until the project has an approved coastal development permit. The grading will need to be completed prior to building permit issuance. This comment is for informational purposes only and no response is necessary. 7. The post development runoff flows and velocities should not exceed pre development storm runoff flows and velocities during a 10-year, 6-hour storm event. The project must be designed to comply with this requirement and hydrology calculations completed by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted to support any findings. This information was not submitted with your last submittal. Filtration of pollutants is already addressed by directing flow over a landscaped permeable surface. 8. City standard requires 2% positive drainage 5 feet away from the foundation. Any lesser distance requires written authorization from a soils engineer. Indicate with a note on the grading plan the percent positive grade away from foundation and the distance between foundation and drainage swale. This information was not submitted with your last submittal. 9. Provide a soils report for this development. Previous reports have been submitted on the property but the reports focused on analyzing bluff retreat rates rather than determining recommendations for grade preparations, spoil remediation and structural design for the proposed project. No report was received with the last plan check submittal. 10. Add the following note and leader to the retaining wall on Parcel 3: "Future retaining wall on Parcel 3 pending coastal development permit approval". Also, lighten the existing contour lines to improve legibility of the retaining wall heights. 11. The project can only be approved upon the condition that an encroachment agreement is processed for the curb located within the right-of-way fronting the subject property. This comment is for informational purposes only and no response is necessary. Memorandum TO: Greg Fisher-Assistant Planner FROM: David Rick-Assistant Engineer DATE: August 8, 2001 CDP 01-13 GOETZ RESIDENCE 2nd CHECK WITH ISSUES Engineering issues which still need to be resolved or adequately addressed prior to staff making a determination on the proposed project are as follows: 1. Revise the grading plan to be consistent with the revisions to the driveway shown on the site plan. Additional concrete surface was added on the site plan to accommodate vehicle back-up but the same revisions were not made on the grading plan. 2. Since the sewer main is deep enough to accommodate gravity flow for the lowest floor level, remove Note 1 on sheet 2 of the grading plan. Add a note stating that "all on-site sewage will gravity flow to the main". 3. On the landscape plan, remove the decorative concrete from the portion of the driveway within the public right-of-way. This portion must be constructed of asphalt concrete or other easily removable material. Also, remove planters from the portion of driveway that was expanded to accommodate maneuvering of vehicles. 4. Where is the 50 feet of fill, as indicated on Sheet 1 of the grading plans, proposed? It appears that all grading consists of cut only. , h,..,; - - - rpifni !-^ is 'v (<*' 5. fJ5er^condition=m3mber-46? the^stairs ace-not permitted within the 45-foot\§etback. They are shown removed from the grading plan but not the site plan or elevation plans. In addition, show the 45-foot bluff setback line and drainage easement on the landscape plan. Remove any shrubs, trees or hardscape from the easement and west of the easement. Landscaping with irrigation and hardscape in this portion of the lot would increase the amount of runoff over the bluff edge. Drainage over the bluff is prohibited beyond natural conditions. 6. A grading permit will be required. The grading plan check process takes approximately 3 months to complete and cannot begin until the project has an approved coastal development permit. The grading will need to be completed prior to building permit issuance. This comment is for informational purposes only and no response is necessary. 7. The post development runoff flows and velocities should not exceed pre development storm runoff flows and velocities during a 10-year, 6-hour storm event. The project must be designed to comply with this requirement and hydrology calculations completed by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted to support any findings. This information was not submitted with your last submittal. Filtration of pollutants is already addressed by directing flow over a landscaped permeable surface. 8. City standard requires 2% positive drainage 5 feet away from the foundation. Any lesser distance requires written authorization from a soils engineer. Indicate with a note on the grading plan the percent positive grade away from foundation and the distance between foundation and drainage swale. This information was not submitted with your last submittal. 9. Provide a soils report for this development. Previous reports have been submitted on the property but the reports focused on analyzing bluff retreat rates rather than determining recommendations for grade preparations, spoil remediation and structural design for the proposed project. No report was received with the last plan check submittal. 10. Add the following note and leader to the retaining wall on Parcel 3: "Future retaining wall on Parcel 3 pending coastal development permit approval". Also, lighten the existing contour lines to improve legibility of the retaining wall heights. 11. The project can only be approved upon the condition that an encroachment agreement is processed for the curb located within the right-of-way fronting the subject property. This comment is for informational purposes only and no response is necessary. If you or the applicant has any questions, please either see or contact me at 602-2781. DAVID Rl(fk Assistant Engineer Engineering Development Services Division Memorandimi TO: Greg Fisher - Assistant Planner FROM: David Rick - Assistant Engineer DATE: April 19, 2001 CDP 01-13 GOETZ RESIDENCE COMPLETNESS AND ISSUES REVIEW Engineering Department staff has completed a review of the above-referenced project for completeness and engineering issues of concern. All items needed for engineering review are provided for determining the application as complete. Engineering issues which need to be resolved or adequately addressed prior to staff making a determination on the proposed project are as follows: 1. Using a 24-foot minimum turning radius template for a passenger design vehicle, design the driveway so that a driver can back out of the garage and exit the property in a forward position. 2. How will sewage at the lower level floor flow to the street sewer main? If a pump is proposed, then indicate so on the floor plan. Otherwise, indicate the sewer main depth on the profiles or grading plans to verify gravity flow. 3. Per condition 13 of the approved Minor Subdivision 98-01 letter, no grading is permitted within the 45-foot bluff setback. The plans show a daylight line within this setback and the words "cut" and "fill" are written within the footprint of the building. Were the words and daylight line inadvertently misaligned? Where is the grading actually proposed? In addition, I do not see any fill on the plan. Revise grading plans to limit grading east of the 45-foot setback line. —^ CTM<V> Oj<. 960L fc€<*WT , Per condition number 16, (me stairs^nd the water sculpture are not permitted -Q ^N* within the 45-foot setback. In addition, show the 45-foot bluff setback line and \iS^ drainage easement on the landscape plan. Remove all landscaping and l\\ stepping-stones from the easement and west of the easement. Landscaping with irrigation and hardscape in this portion of the lot would increase the amount of runoff over the bluff edge. Drainage over the bluff is prohibited beyond natural conditions. 4. A grading permit will be required. The grading plan check process takes approximately 3 months to complete and cannot begin until the project has an approved coastal development permit. The grading will need to be completed prior to building permit issuance. This comment is for informational purposes only and no response is necessary. 5. The post development runoff flows and velocities should not exceed pre development storm runoff flows and velocities during a 10-year, 6-hour storm event. The project must be designed to comply with this requirement and hydrology calculations completed by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted to support any findings. Filtration of pollutants is already addressed by directing flow over a landscaped permeable surface. 6. City standard requires 2% positive drainage 5 feet away from the foundation. Any lesser distance requires written authorization from a soils engineer. Indicate with a note on the grading plan the percent positive grade away from foundation and the distance between foundation and drainage swale. 7. Where does water travel once it enters the drain inlet located at the northeast corner of the property? Why not remove the inlet and design to surface flow across lawn and walkway? 8. Provide a soils report for this development. Previous reports have been submitted on the property but the reports focused on analyzing bluff retreat rates rather than determining recommendations for grade preparations, spoil remediation and structural design for the proposed project. 9. On each side of the property, coordinate with adjacent property owners to determine correct illustration of existing or proposed walls. Also, some of the wall heights have TW labeled where BW would be provided. Please correct. If you or the applicant has any questions, please either see or contact me at 602-2781. DAVID RICK Assistant Engineer Engineering Development Services Division City of Carlsbad Planning Department April 26, 2001 Roy Asaro P.O. Box 8543 Rancho Santa Fe, Ca 92064 SUBJECT: CDP 01-13 - GOETZ RESIDENCE Thank you for applying for Land Use Permits in the City of Carlsbad. The Planning Department has reviewed your Coastal Development Permit, application no. CDP 01-13 - Goetz Residence, as to its completeness for processing. The application is incomplete, as submitted. Attached are two lists. The first list is information which must be submitted to complete your application. This list of items must be submitted directly to your staff planner by appointment. All list items must be submitted simultaneously and a copy of this list must be included with your submittals. No processing of your application can occur until the application is determined to be complete. The second list is issues of concern to staff. When all required materials are submitted the City has 30 days to make a determination of completeness. If the application is determined to be complete, processing for a decision on the application will be initiated. In addition, please note that you have six months from the date the application was initially filed, March 29, 2001, to either resubmit the application or submit the required information. Failure to resubmit the application or to submit the materials necessary to determine your application complete shall be deemed to constitute withdrawal of the application. If an application is withdrawn or deemed withdrawn, a new application must be submitted. Please contact your staff planner, Greg Fisher, at (760) 602-4629, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. The red-line copy needs to be returned with the re-submittal. Sincerely, MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director MJH:GF:cs Chris DeCerbo David Rick File Copy Data Entry Planning Aide 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us LIST OF ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION No. CDP 01-13 - Goetz Residence Planning: 1. Please provide a separate site plan showing a "stringline" exhibit. The stringline exhibit is required by the Coastal Commission and accurately shows the horizontal alignment between all rear yard structures, including like amenities such as decks, patios, balconies, trellises, pools, spas, etc. The subject property must be compared to the nearest developed properties to the north and south. Please show on the "stingline" exhibit the approved "Jenson Residence" to the north and the proposed "Frye Residence" to the south. Please show the complete footprint for both adjacent properties. 2. Provide a soils report for this development. Previous reports have been submitted on the property but the reports focused on analyzing bluff retreat rates rather than determining recommendations for grade preparations and structural design for the proposed project. Please make sure that the Geo-Report addresses bluff stability for at least 75 years or the expected life time of the structure, whichever is greater. 3. Please provide a "beach profile" that would provide the following information: Accurately depict the mean-high tide line; show all proposed structures, walls, decks, patio areas, landscaping, etc. if any, that can be seen from the beach elevation; show any proposed sea wall (if none, please state on site plan). 4. Provide a recent preliminary title report or grant deed of title that indicates that Dean Goetz is the property owner. Engineering: 1. Provide a soils report for this development. Previous reports have been submitted on the property but the reports focused on analyzing bluff retreat rates rather than determining recommendations for grade preparations, spoil remediation and structural design for the proposed project. ISSUES OF CONCERN Planning: 1. The proposed sheet metal roof requires Planning Director approval. Please provide a sample as part of your resubmittal. 2. What is the height of the entryway gate? Please provide a profile. As a reminder, the maximum height of all walls, fences and gates including decorative pilasters is 42" within the required front yard setback. The proposed wall located along the northern property line exceeds the maximum height of six feet. Please correct to meet the allowed height limit. Please provide on the site plan and show in detail any proposed fencing that runs parallel with Carlsbad Boulevard. Per the California Coastal Commission, the fencing material must be open to allow westerly views as seen from Carlsbad Boulevard. A solution would be to use iron rod fencing. 3. Per condition number 16, the water sculpture is not permitted within the 45-foot setback. Please remove from all plans. In addition, show the 45-foot bluff setback line and drainage easement on the landscape plan. Remove all landscaping and stepping- stones from the easement and west of the easement. Landscaping with irrigation and hardscape in this portion of the lot would increase the amount of runoff over the bluff edge. Drainage over the bluff is prohibited beyond natural conditions. 4. Please provide the general plan designation, lot coverage and proposed building height within the general information summary. If the total building footprint is the same as the lot coverage, please change the plan text to lot coverage. 5. Please provide and label on the site plan the bluff top edge from which the 45' setback is measured. Also, indicate the 45' setback by using bearing and distances as shown on Final Map 98-01. 6. For your information, the City is reviewing and processing a Costal Development Permit on the adjacent property to the south. The applicant's name and contact number is Steven Ash @ 949-489-5737. It might be of some mutual benefit to contact him regarding the "stringline" exhibit. 7. Per the California Coastal Commission, the total amount of grading allowed is limited to the "least amount necessary" to accommodate development. The proposed grading quantity (500 CY cut) is considered excessive. Please redesign the project to reduce the grading quantity by half. 8. Please provide on the elevation drawings the maximum proposed height measured from existing grade or the new grade whichever is most restrictive (lower). It appears that a new more restrictive grade is being proposed yet the height is being measured from existing grade. The City's building height definition is attached for your convenience. 21.04.065 Building height. (a) The height of a building shall be measured as follows: (1) "Building height" means the vertical distance of a structure measured from the more restrictive (lowest) of finished or existing grade. The vertical distance is measured from all points at grade along and within the building coverage to the highest point of the structure directly above that point of measurement. (2) "Existing grade," for the purposes of measuring building height, means the ground level elevation which existed on or before August 1, 1991 and prior to any grading or other site preparation related to, or to be incorporated into, a proposed new development or alteration of existing developments unless a discretionary permit for such developments or alterations is approved. In that case, existing grade shall mean the grade after the property is developed or improved in accordance with the grading plans which implement the approved discretionary permit. For nondiscretionary permits where retaining walls, fill or other grading are utilized to create finished grade higher in elevation than existing grade as defined in this subsection and as determined by the planning director, then existing grade shall be used in the determination of building height.(3) Building height measurements include basements and other subterranean areas that are above existing grade. In the case of basements, cellars and underground parking, building height is measured from existing grade, excluding the area below existing grade. (4) Building height is measured to the peak of the structure. Per Section 21.46.020 of this title, roof structures specifically for the housing of elevators, stairways, tanks, ventilating fans or similar equipment required to operate and maintain the building; fire or parapet walls, skylights, architectural towers, flagpoles, chimneys, smokestacks, wireless masts and similar structures may be erected above the height limits prescribed in this title, but no roof structure or any other space above the height limit prescribed for the zone in which the building is located shall be allowed for the purpose of providing additional floor space, or be taller than the minimum height requirement to accommodate or enclose the intended use. (Ord. NS-204 § 2, 1992: Ord. NS-180 § 3, 1991: Ord. 9667, 1983: Ord. 9498 § 1, 1978: Ord. 9141 § 1: Ord. 9060 § 212) Engineering: 9. Using a 24-foot minimum turning radius template for a passenger design vehicle, design the driveway so that a driver can back out of the garage and exit the property in a forward position. 10. How will sewage at the lower level floor flow to the street sewer main? If a pump is proposed, then indicate so on the floor plan. Otherwise, indicate the sewer main depth on the profiles or grading plans to verify gravity flow. 11. Per condition 13 of the approved Minor Subdivision 98-01 letter, no grading is permitted within the 45-foot bluff setback. The plans show a daylight line within this setback and the words "cut" and "fill" are written within the footprint of the building. Were the words and daylight line inadvertently misaligned? Where is the grading actually proposed? In addition, I do not see any fill on the plan. Revise grading plans to limit grading east of the 45-foot setback line. Per condition number 16, the stairs and the water sculpture are not permitted within the 45-foot setback. In addition, show the 45-foot bluff setback line and drainage easement on the landscape plan. Remove all landscaping and stepping-stones from the easement and west of the easement. Landscaping with irrigation and hardscape in this portion of the lot would increase the amount of runoff over the bluff edge. Drainage over the bluff is prohibited beyond natural conditions. 12. A grading permit will be required. The grading plan check process takes approximately 3 months to complete and cannot begin until the project has an approved coastal development permit. The grading will need to be completed prior to building permit issuance. This comment is for informational purposes only and no response is necessary. 13. The post development runoff flows and velocities should not exceed pre development storm runoff flows and velocities during a 10-year, 6-hour storm event. The project must be designed to comply with this requirement and hydrology calculations completed by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted to support any findings. Filtration of pollutants is already addressed by directing flow over a landscaped permeable surface. 14. City standard requires 2% positive drainage 5 feet away from the foundation. Any lesser distance requires written authorization from a soils engineer. Indicate with a note on the grading plan the percent positive grade away from foundation and the distance between foundation and drainage swale. 1 5. Where does water travel once it enters the drain inlet located at the northeast corner of the property? Why not remove the inlet and design to surface flow across lawn and walkway? 1 6. On each side of the property, coordinate with adjacent property owners to determine correct illustration of existing or proposed walls. Also, some of the wall heights have TW labeled where BW would be provided. Please correct.