HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 02-14; Bressi Ranch Residential; Tentative Map (CT) (14)*""*>,.
» "UP"
City of Carlsbad
Planning Department
March 7, 2003
Lennar Communities
Kristine Zortman
5780 Fleet Street Suite 320
Carlsbad CA 92008
SUBJECT: MP 178(A)/CT 02-14/PUD 02-06/CUP 02-17 BRESSI RANCH RESIDENTIAL
Thank you for applying for Land Use Permits in the City of Carlsbad. The Planning Department
has reviewed your development applications nos. MP 178(A), CT 02-14, PUD 02-06, and CUP
02-17 as to their 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, including five (5) sets of plans. 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, July 12, 2002, 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If an application is withdrawn or deemed withdrawn, a new application must be submitted.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, Christer Westman, at (760) 602-4614, or staff engineer Clyde
Wickham at (760) 602-2742, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss
the application.
Sincerely,
MICHAEL J.
Planning Director
MJH:CW:sn
Don Neu
Clyde Wickham
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
W
LIST OF ITEMS NEEDED
TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION
No. MP 178(A)/CT 02-14/PUD 02-06/CUP 02-17- BRESSI RANCH RESIDENTIAL
Planning:
1. The maintenance plan sheets leave some areas blank. As an example, some areas that
should be HOA maintained are not identified as such.
2. Elevations should be provided for significant structures within the common parks.
3. Street trees are not shown for some areas. Please include the tree planting scheme for all
planning areas.
4. Garden walls are shown in section for planning areas 7 and 8 at the front property line, but
are not shown on the plot plans. Please explain why. Will there be any type of fencing on
top of these garden walls? Will each home in PAs 7 and 8 have a short stairway directly
from the sidewalk up to the pad level? Plan two in PA 7 shows a stairway to the front
courtyard. Will there really be a stairway?
5. A typical location for return fencing should be shown on the floorplans for all product.
6. See redline prints for additional comments.
ISSUES OF CONCERN
Planning:
1. PA 8; Plan 1: Farmhouse. Although the wrap-around porch looks great in elevation, the
effect of the side porch may very well be lost in most cases when plotted on the lot. I
suggest possibly capturing the porch space adjacent to the dining room as interior space
thereby shortening the extent of the porch toward the rear of the lot.
2. After reviewing the fencing plans it became apparent that final plans will need to be
developed once each floor plan has been matched to an elevation style. Refer to comments
on the fencing plan for individual lot suggestions. However a basic fencing strategy can be
developed at this time. The components of that strategy should be as follows:
• Perimeter fencing should either be of a solid masonry material, wrought iron view, or
combination of the two.
• Street side yard fencing should be solid masonry because it requires less maintenance
once constructed and is more durable than wooden fencing.
• Wooden fencing is appropriate for internal rear and side yards. The exception may be
if the rear yard fence is at the toe of a slope.
• Side yard return fencing should be a straight shot from one home to the next as much
as possible. Return fencing should be positioned far enough back from the front plane
of the home to allow for shrub and/or tree planting opportunities. Pulling the return
fencing back from the building face also visually strengthens building separation.
3. Regarding fence designs, is your intention to use the same fence designs for each of the
different residential planning areas?
4. Some homes should be angled to be more parallel with their corresponding front property
line for the purpose of making the front door more visible from the street.
5. In planning area 7, the side yard including the courtyard is the premium outdoor space for
the lot. Homes should be plotted to take maximum advantage of side yard courtyard
combinations.
6. The front door element may be strengthened on the plan one in planning area 9 by bringing
the entry element forward. Farmhouse = porch. Colonial = portico. Eclectic = garden gate.
7. See individual architectural plans for comments. However, a general comment is that so
much effort is spent developing front elevations that are extraordinary yet the garage doors,
which are still a significant element of the street presence, are presented as generic one
design fits all. I suggest that some thought be given to how the garage doors will
compliment the overall appearance of each elevation.
8. See redline prints for additional comments. Please return the redline prints with your next
submittal.