Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCDP 97-52; Kelly Ranch Corporate Center; Coastal Development Permit (CDP) (6)i-p -7. city 0 April 17, 1998 Richard S. Allen Kelly Ranch Corporate Center I, LLC 4365 Executive Drive, Suite 850 San Diego, CA 92121 SUBJECT: SDP 97-251CDP 97-52126 98-03 - KELLY CORPORATE CENTER Thank you for applying for Land Use Permits in the City of Carlsbad. The Planning Department has reviewed your Site Development Plan, Coastal Development Permit, and Zone Change application no. SDP 97-25, CDP 97-52, and ZC 98-03, as to its completeness for processing. All of the items requested of you earlier have not been received and therefore your application is still deemed incomplete. Listed below are the item(s) still needed in order to deem your application as complete. 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. 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, November 17, 1997, 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 If an application is withdrawn or deemed withdrawn, a new application must be submitted.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, Don Neu, at (7601 438-l 161, extension 4446, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sine y, Ali plcLg~g2: d 11 MJH: DN:kc c: Gary Wayne Tony Grant, Smith Consulting Architects Adrienne Landers Richard C. Kelly Clyde Wickham Bobbie Hoder File Copy Data Entry Planning Aide 2075 La Palmas Dr. l Carlsbad, CA 92009-l 576 - (760) 438-l 161 - FAX (760) 438-0894 @ LIST OF ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION No. SDP 97-25/CDP 97-52/ZC 98-03 Planning: 1. As previously requested please provide a roof plan showing the location of roof appurtenances and mechanical equipment. Adequate parapet heights must be designed into the building elevations to avoid the need for future equipment screens. A minimum parapet height of approximately 5 feet appears to be necessary based on the average height of commonly proposed roof equipment. 2. A Local Coastal Program Amendment application is required because of the zone change. Any zone change in the Coastal Zone requires the approval of a Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA). The California Coastal Commission will be required to approve the LCPA. 3. The revised traffic report does not adequately analyze the proposed multi-tenant office project as compared to the planned industrial project included in the City Traffic model. The traffic model also included the Kelly Property on the east side of Aviara Parkway in the evaluation. Therefore, to make an adequate comparison of the impact of the multi-tenant office project, development needs to be included for the eastern most parcel for which no constructioniscurrently proposed. The report also consistently refers to corporate office uses as being in the category of trip generation equaling 8 ADT per 1,000 square feet which is not reflected in the SANDAG Trip Generation Table. Enclosed is a copy of the traffic report containing Planning staff comments. Please revise the report as requested and submit 3 copies of the new document. The traffic division will need to review and approve the revised report. If the report shows that the project does not comply with the Growth Management Circulation Performance Standard staff will not be able to recommend approval of the project. This is one of the most sianificant Droiect issues at this time. Engineering: 1. There is still a problem with the 5-foot minimum clear distance requirement when adjacent stalls are located perpendicular to each other. Please note comments in site plan and, if you wish, schedule an appointment with me to review this requirement. 2. Show the distance from Palomar Airport Road to the driveway on Aviara Parkway. 3. A preliminary review has been done of the revised transportation analysis. Please note comments in report. After adjustment of traffic generation figures and completion of impacts analysis, the report will be reviewed by the Traffic Division. Some issues that will need to be resolved include: a) Existing intersection peak hour traffic counts might have to be updated because of the numerous changes to the traffic patterns in this area due to the recently completed developments; b) The future use of the balance of Parcel 3 east of Aviara Parkway needs to be included in the study; cl Traffic volumes at the project driveways need to be included in all projections; and d) Analysis needs to include an investigation of the possible need of free right turns into project at both Aviara Parkway and Hidden Valley Road driveways (include future access to balance of Parcel 3). 4. Note other comments in both the architectural site plan and the engineering site development plan. ISSUES OF CONCERN Planning: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Planning Staff previously requested that a biologist’s report be submitted which establishes the limits of the riparian area on site. The biologist must also establish the required 50 foot buffer area pursuant to the policies of the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program. It was requested that the biologist also consult with the California Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The vegetation survey and impact assessment prepared by the project’s landscape architect may not be acceptable to the wildlife agencies. Please provide correspondence from both of these agencies. concerning their concurrence with the assessment and the project as designed. The revised design has encroachments into the 50 foot buffer area at the southeast corner of the site. This is inconsistent with Policies 3-7 and 3-8 of the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program. The trash enclosure on Parcel 3 was not relocated to the south side of the building as requested. Please revise the location as noted on the redlined checkprint of the project plans. An area of the drive aisle north of building 3 does not scale out to the required 24 foot width. The location is noted on the redlined checkprint. Please revise the plan to meet the required zoning standard. Numerical counts need to be provided on the landscape plan which demonstrate that the plans comply with the requirement of providing 1 tree for every 4 parking spaces. The revised materials board that was submitted needs to have the letter code added to it which corresponds to the sheets containing the building elevations. Enclosed are redlined checkprints of the project plan containing revisions required to be made. Please make the revisions noted and return the redlined checkprints along with 3 sets of the revised plans.