Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 91-07; La Vercia Condominiums; Tentative Map (CT) (2)CITY OF CARLSBAD Interoffice Correspondence TO: Elaine Blackburn, Planning PROM: Teresa C. Smith SUBJECT: La Vercia Condos CT 91-07/CP 91-04 OFFICE: Engineering DATE: June 3, 1991 The Engineering items needed to deem this application package complete are as follows: 1. A Preliminary Soils Report - The report should include a. A statement specifically addressing the proposed drainage along the westerly side of the property which is designed to allow for sump conditions 3 feet away from the buildings. b. An evaluation as to whether the existing wall can handle the loading proposed by this project. 2. Clarification of the wall(s) proposed adjacent to the easterly property line is needed. The Tentative Map/Site Development plan shows a 5 foot safety fence. - The Preliminary Landscape plans show a 5 foot stucco wall. Additional spot elevations along the westerly property line are needed in order to evaluate the grading proposed in this area. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT LAND USE REVIEW DIVISIONAL TRANSMITTAL To Project Planner : Elaine Blackburn June 3, 1991 From : Teresa C. Smith CT 91-07/CP 91-04 Via Assistant City Engineer : David Hauser COMPLETENESS REVIEW AND INITIAL ISSUES STATEMENT The Engineering Department has completed its review of the subject project for application completeness. The application and plans submitted for this project are: Complete and suitable for continued review. x Incomplete and unsuitable for further review. Please see the attached checklist for missing or incomplete items. In addition the Engineering Department made a preliminary review of the project for Engineering issues. (See attached initial review and assessment checklist.) Major Engineering issues which need to be resolved or adequately addressed prior to conditioning of the project are as follows: 1. The garage and visitor parking area adjacent to Unit 5 will do not accommodate the required 3 point turnaround. 2. Clarification of the intent of the proposed wall along the easterly property line. 3. Guardrail should be placed along the easterly property line. 4. The drainage pattern along the westerly property line does not have an overflow path (2nd outfall). A statement from the Soils Engineer specifically allowing this is required prior to approval. 5. If offsite grading is proposed, a Letter of permission to Grade from the adjacent property owner is required. 6. A 20 foot queuing distance from the back of the future sidewalk to the first parking space is required. 7. The garage at Unit 5 and the adjacent parking space do not allow for a 3 point turnaround. 8. The easterly driveway apron must be a minimum of 3 feet from the easterly property line. 9. Show the proposed sewer lateral or private sewer line. 10. Show the proposed water lateral or private water line. 11. Offsite drainage improvements may be required. Show proposed construction for the storm drain if Tamarack Avenue improvements are not in place prior to construction of this proj ect. Completeness and Review Issues Statement CT 91-07/CP 91-04 June 3, 1991 Page 2 of 2 12. If drainage pattern at the southwest side of the project is proposed as shown on the SDP, raingutters should be added to prevent roof runoff from entering that area. The roof drainage should drain to the driveway to connect directly into the underground stormdrain system. 13. Grading along the westerly property line appears to show slopes steeper than 2:1. 14. Address condition of existing retaining wall. Can the existing wall support the load proposed by this project? Also attached is a redlined checkprint of the site plan. This plan should be given to the applicant for corrections and changes as noted. Please have the applicant return the redlined print with the correct site plan to assist us in our continued review. TO: Elaine Blackburn FROM Jim Davis VIA PRINCIPAL LAND USE ENGINEER Ajt^ CT 92-07 La Vercia 1. The finished floor elevations of Units 4 and 5 need to be raised to achieve failsafe drainage. The high point elevation (55.7) is higher than the F.F elevations of Unit 4 (55.4) and Unit 5 (54.4). 2. The applicant is reminded that the drainage design of this project depends on the completion of the public storm drain in Tamarack Avenue. Any redesign that would be needed to make the site drain to the street without the public storm drain is not likely to ^bc. meet the requirements for finding of substantial conformance due to the extent of the changes in grades. Therefore an map application would likely be needed.