Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 97-01; Rancho Carrillo Village H; Tentative Map (CT) (2)City of Carlsbad Planning Department June 28, 2001 Steve Payne 6900 Green Leaf Ct Granite Bay CA 95746 RE: 6207 PASEO COLINA CARRILLO - LOT 2 CT 97-01 - VILLAGE H - RANCHO Dear Mr. Payne: The City has reviewed the request to modify the noise attenuation wall located on lot 2 of Carlsbad Tract 97-01, also identified as 6207 Paseo Colina in Village H of Rancho Carrillo. The wall was built to attenuate noise generated by vehicular traffic on Melrose Drive. The proposed modifications can be made as follows: The eastern 1/3 shall remain in full height and of masonary material to attenuate noise; the middle 1/3 of the wall may be reduced to a combination wall/open fence with the wall portion not to be less than three feet in height; and the western 1/3 may be open fence of material to match the adjacent view fencing. The modified wall/fence will still attenuate a bulk of the roadway noise with the solid wall on the eastern portion of the property. The gradual decrease in the fence height will emulate the decrease in noise levels with the increase in distance from the roadway. The property has recorded against it a notice that the property is subject to noise from the Melrose Drive circulation element roadway that serves as disclosure that the property may be subject to significant noise levels. The open fencing will permit views to the adjacent open space area to the north. If you have any questions regarding the above, please call me at 602-4613. Sincerely, '^M^Van Lynch Associate Planner VL:cs File 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us HUNSAKER ^ASSOCIATES SAN DIEGO, INC. IRVINE LAS VEGAS RIVERSIDE SAN DIEGO MEMORANDUM Date: Octobers, 1999 To: Mr. Van Lynch, City of Carlsbad Planning Department From: Ryan Martin, Engineering Department Subject: Side Yard Setback for Lot 60 DAVE HAMMAR ]ACK HILL LEX WILLIMAN This memo is in regards to the Planning Department comment on Lot 60 within the project Rancho Carrillo Village "H". Per our discussion on Monday, October 9, 1999, it was agreed that we will utilize the Carlsbad Municipal Code 21.10.040, Section A, Part 2 to reduce the side yard setback on this particular lot. Enclosed is a plot showing the worst case scenario with the plotting on the adjacent lot. Please let me know if you have any other comments in regards to this lot. Otherwise, we will proceed with the plotting as shown on the plot plan. Thank you for your assistance. 10179 Huennekens St. Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92121 (619) 558-4500 PH (619) 558-1414 EX www.hunsaker.com lnfo@HunsakerSD.com RM:kd k:\1443\1999\a26.doc wo 1443-7 loll brothers, °Inc. Quality Homes By Design9 March 17,1999 Mr. Brian Hunter flAR 25 1999 City of Carlsbad - Planning Department ^^ — „,-,, „ 2075 Las Palmas Drive ™TY OF Carlsbad, CA 92009 Dear Mr. Hunter, As per our discussion regarding the Design Guidelines for Village "H" at Rancho Carrillo, the reference to "hilltop lots" on page three (3) will refer to Lots 1-11 and 27-33 depicted on Exhibit "A" attached. Please do not hesitate to call me if you have any questions at (760) 804-9067. Sincerely, Charles Raddatz Project Manager The Estates at Rancho Carrillo New York Stock Exchange • Symbol TOL 2100 West Orangewood Avenue, Suite 180, Orange, CA 92868 Telephone (714) 935-0700 * INDICATES HILLTOP LOTS SEE DESIGN GUIDELINES, PAGE 3 EXHIBIT "A" RANCHO CARRILLO, VILLAGE H VILLAGE H DESIGN GUIDELINES 1. INTRODUCTION Village H is located between Melrose Avenue and the western boundary of the Rancho Carrillo Master Plan. This village will be developed as a gate guarded single family detached subdivision with private streets. There will be a total of 73 residential lots within this village and they will be developed with semi-custom production homes on an average lot size of over 9,500 square feet. The large lots and semi-custom homes will create one of the most prestigious villages in Rancho Carrillo. The semi-custom single family detached homes allow home buyers to select their lot, the floor plan, elevation and a number of other interior and exterior details to create a semi- custom look to their home. The developer of Village H will restrict the color scheme of the homes so that two homes with the exact same color scheme will not be plotted directly adjacent to one another. The ability for the purchaser to become involved in the design and construction of their homes is highly appealing while resulting in a streetscape that has more of the look of a custom home neighborhood. As shown by following sections, the various combinations of roof colors, floor plans, front elevation treatments and color schemes will create a diversified streetscape. Village H - Design Guidelines 1 November 1997 2. UNIT MIX FOR SEMI-CUSTOM PRODUCTION UNITS Minimum Maximum Number of floor plans 3 8 Number of two-story plans 2 5 Number of one-story plans 1 3 Number of front elevations per floor plan 2 4 Maximum building heights One-story home Two-story home 25 feet 30 feet 3. PLOTTING All units shall be plotted within the prescribed building envelope as shown on the Architectural Data Exhibit approved as a part of the tentative map for Village H. Plotting shall alternate floor plans so that no individual elevation is plotted for more than 60% of the total units on any individual street. No two units with identical front elevations shall be plotted on adjacent lots on the same side of the street. Units may be plotted in phases or sequences as long as they are plotted in conformance with the requirements of Village H Design Guidelines. If the units plotted on these lots do not utilize the entire building envelope, future homeowners shall have the ability to construct a room addition within this envelope, as long as the overall building coverage does not exceed 40% of the lot area. The matrix included as Exhibit A of these guidelines shall be attached to the plot plan for each building phase of this tentative map. This matrix shall show how each phase and the overall project complies with the % requirements of Sections 2(Unit Mix), 3(Plotting), 5 G, H&I(Architecture) and 11 (Lot Drains) of these guidelines. This matrix may be modified subject to the approval of the Planning Director when the floor plans and elevations for this tentative map are approved. 4. SETBACKS Front 15' to the livable portion of the building. 10' for garages turned 90 degrees from the street. 20' for garages facing the street. This may be reduced to 5' for Lots 2, 19, 28, 29, 35, 36, 44, 52, 54, 55, 70, 71, & 72. Village H - Design Guidelines 2 November 1997 Side yard Parallel All buildings shall be setback 10' from the property line, to a Street Side 10% of the lot width (up to a maximum of 10 feet). Per section 21.10.040a(2) (R-l Zone) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, some of the lots may have one side yard setback reduced to five feet provided that the opposite side yard setback has been increased, as an offsetting setback, a minimum distance equal to the reduction. Hilltop Lots All buildings shall be setback 15' from the top of slope. Rear Twice the required side yard (up to a maximum of 20 feet). Note: Building envelope edges may adjust out prior to building permits if a retaining wall of up to 3' height (as allowed by the Master Plan) is added to the slope as long as 5' minimum separation is provided between the toe of any slope and the unit. The rear edge of building envelopes can expand out if a small (3' max.) retaining wall is approved to hold back the toe of slope to produce a minimum 20' useable rear yard. 5. ARCHITECTURE A. The architectural theme of this project shall be selected from one or more of the following styles that have been approved as a part of the Rancho Carrillo Master Plan: Spanish Colonial Revival Craftsman California Mission Bungalow Monterey Prairie Spanish Eclectic California Ranch B. The design of the unit exteriors shall be varied to create variety and interest within the Village. The following materials may be used on the front exteriors to create this variety: brick or brick veneer, wood trim, stucco and stone. C. A maximum of four chimneys shall be permitted on any one residence. D. At least three color schemes shall be provided for the stucco portions of the units within this village. Village H - Design Guidelines 3 November 1997 E. Twenty-five percent of exterior openings, doors/windows, shall be recessed or projected a minimum of two inches and shall be with vinyl, wood or colored aluminum frames (no mill finishes). F. Roofs shall have a variety of slopes which should be complimentary to the adjacent slopes. G. Twenty-five percent of all units shall be single story or have a single story edge for 40% of the perimeter of the building. For the purpose of this guideline, the single story edge shall be a minimum depth of 3 feet. The units qualifying under the 25% shall be distributed throughout the project. This guideline is to ensure some building relief on the front and sides of each unit. H. At least 40% of the units in this project shall have at least three separate building planes on street side elevations. The minimum offset in planes shall be 18 inches and shall include, but not be limited to building walls, windows and roofs. The minimum depth between the faces of the forward-most plane and the rear plane on the front elevation shall be minimum of 10 feet. A plane must be a minimum of 30 sq. ft. to receive credit under this section. I. Rear elevations shall adhere to the same criteria outlined in paragraph H for front elevations, except that the minimum depth between front and back planes on the rear elevation shall be a minimum of three feet. 6. GARAGES A. All garages shall have a minimum interior dimension of 20' by 20'. B. Three car garage units shall be a mix of units with three separate one car garage doors all on the same plane and units with a two car garage door and a one car garage door combination. The doors shall be offset a minimum of 12". Driveways serving three car garages shall have a minimum width of 24' at the back of sidewalk and have a curvilinear side flaring to its greatest width at the entrance to the garage. C. Garage doors shall be designed to set into the walls rather than being flush with exterior walls. 7. ACCESSORY STRUCTURES Accessory structures shall be permitted as allowed by section 21.10.050(1)(D) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (R-l Zone). Village H - Design Guidelines 4 November 1997 8. WALLS AND FENCES Walls and fences shall be provided as shown by the Village H Landscape Exhibit. 9. SIGNAGE Signage will be provided to identify the village and provide directional information. All signage will be developed in accordance with the Village H Landscape Exhibit. The exact location of these signs will be determined prior to final map approval. Signage shall be approved pursuant to Chapter 21.41 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. 10. SPECIAL LOTS Lots 11, 43, and 69, are being developed as panhandle lots. The buildable portion of these lots shall have a minimum area of 8,000 square feet. Each of these lots shall have three non- tandem parking spaces. Fencing shall be provided to screen the adjacent residences from light and glare from the parking provided on these lots. 11. LOT DRAINS Private lot drains are approved for lots fronting on steep streets. Lot drains allow pad elevations to be lowered along steeper streets thereby increasing rear yards and setbacks from the tops of slopes. The maximum number of lots using these drains shall be limited as follows: Street < 2.5% < 2.5 - 5% < 5 - 7.5% <7.5- 12% Maximum % of Lots 50% 75% 90% 100% Village H - Design Guidelines 5 November 1997 12. SECOND UNITS Up to 50% of the lots in Village H may be developed with second dwelling units as defined under section 21.04.303 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. All second units shall be developed in conformance with the requirements of section 21.10.015(c)(3) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, the Rancho Carrillo Master Plan and the Village H Design Guidelines. The developer of Village H has the option to develop the second units concurrently with the primary units. If the developer chooses this option to fulfill a portion of his inclusionary requirement, the second units shall be processed pursuant to the requirements of Section 21.10.015 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. 13. MINOR MODIFICATIONS A cumulative change to five or less of the provisions of these guidelines is considered a minor modification and may be approved by the Planning Director. However, each change must be determined to be in substantial conformance with the approved project. Village H - Design Guidelines O November 1997 April 16, 1998 s Richard Rudolf Assistant City Attorney City of Carlsbad 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008-1989 RE: Rancho Carrillo Village H (CT 97-01) - Access to Bressi Knoll Dear Richard, ' • , Enclosed- is the executed Agreement to Negotiate Access Easements with original signatures and required notary. Per our attorney, Richard Schulman, the enclosed agreement includes all of the language that you and Mr. Schulman came to an agreement on. This agreement satisfies Condition #61 of CT 97-01 and it is my understanding that this agreement will be docketed for the same hearing as the final map for Village H. Thank you for your assistance in resolving this condition. Very truly yours, Continental Ranch, Inc. ' David A. Lother Vice President, Development dahnn Enclosure cc: Mike Shirey Brian Hunter Richard Schulman Mike Howes Craig Kahlen 12636 High Bluff Drive, Suite 300 San Diego, CA 92130 T: (619) 793-2580 F: (619) 793-2575 A Continental Homes Community RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND ) WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: ) ) City Clerk ) City of Carlsbad ) 1200 Carlsbad Village Dr. ) Carlsbad, CA 92008 ) : L Space above for Recorder's use only AGREEMENT TO NEGOTIATE ACCESS EASEMENTS This AGREEMENT TO NEGOTIATE ACCESS EASEMENTS ("Agreement") is entered into effective , 1998, by and between CONTINENTAL RANCH, INC., a California corporation doing business as Continental Homes ("CRI") and the CITY OF CARLSBAD, a California municipal corporation (the "City") , with reference to the following: A. CRI owns and is developing a residential project in the City called "Rancho Carrillo." B. The City approved a tentative subdivision map, identified as "CT 97-01," for Village "H" of Rancho Carrillo. A legal description of the subject real property ("Village H," or the "Property") is attached hereto as Exhibit "A." C. Condition 61 of CT 97-01 requires the developer, as a condition of approval of a final map for CT 97-01, to enter into a recorded agreement with the City pursuant to which the developer would negotiate in good faith, subject to certain terms, with a neighboring property owner regarding access. D. This Agreement is intended to satisfy Condition 61 of CT 97-01. THE PARTIES AGREE: I. AGREEMENT TO NEGOTIATE. A. Recitals and Exhibits. The above recitals (the "Recitals") are true and correct. The Recitals and all exhibits attached hereto are incorporated into this Agreement. B. Additional Definition. As used in this Agreement, "Developer" shall mean the entity owning the Property. C. Sub-ieet of Negotiation. Developer shall negotiate in good faith with the owner of adjoining property commonly called Bressi Ranch, offering to enter into an access and cost sharing / / / -I- agreement with the owner of Bressi Ranch whereby (a) the owners of not more than ten (10) homes developed on that particular portion of Bressi Ranch (the "Knoll") depicted on Exhibit "B" attached hereto would have the recorded right to ingress and egress along H-A, H-B, and H-E Streets and across proposed Lot No. 7 of the Property; (b) the width of the easement across Lot No. 7 of the Property would be a minimum of forty-six feet; (c) the parties would grant reciprocal access easements along proposed H-A, H-B, and H-E Streets and across proposed Lot No. 7 of the Property to be recorded concurrently with the approval of a final map on the "Knoll"; (d) maintenance for all these streets within the Property would be the responsibility of the Rancho Carrillo Master Association; (e) the owners of homes in Bressi Ranch who take access over these streets would be obligated to share in the pro rata costs of maintenance of the streets pursuant to Civil Code Section 845; and (f) the Master Declaration of Restrictions for Rancho Carrillo would include the following disclosure: "It is intended that a portion (referred to as '.The Knoll') of the adjoining property (currently known as Bressi Ranch) will be provided ingress and egress through Village H of Rancho Carrillo." D. Term. This Agreement shall be valid for a period of five (5) years or until the easements described in paragraph I.C., above, are granted, whichever comes first. If no access and cost sharing agreement has been entered into within five (5) years despite Developer's good faith negotiation, Lot No. 7 of Village H may be developed. E. Determination of Good Faith Negotiation. The City's Director of Public Works (or the official with the most similar duties, should the City terminate the use of that title) shall determine in his reasonable discretion, upon Developer's application, whether the obligations of this Agreement have been satisfied, including whether Developer has negotiated in good faith with the owner of Bressi Ranch. If the City's Public Works Director so determines at any time, the City's Public Works Director shall record a release of this Agreement allowing Lot No. 7 of Village H to be developed. The requirement of "good faith negotiations" does not contemplate Developer giving property without just compensation. F. Satisfaction of Condition 61. The signing and recordation of this Agreement satisfies condition 61 of CT 97-01. II. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. A. Integration. The undersigned, and each of them, acknowledge and represent that no promise or inducement not expressed herein has been made in connection with this Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement and understanding between the parties as to the subject matter of this Agreement. -2- B. Waiver and Amendment. No.provision of this Agreement, or breach of any provision, can be waived except in writing. Waiver of any provision or breach shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other provision, or of any subsequent breach of the same or other provision. This Agreement may be amended, modified or rescinded only in writing signed by all parties to this Agreement. C. Benefit and Burden. This Agreement shall be recorded in the Official Records of the County of San Diego. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective successors in interest with respect to the Property. This Agreement is not intended to benefit any third person other than the parties hereto and their respective successors in interest. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Agreement on the date first above written. CONTINENTAL RANCH, INC. CITY OF CARLSBAD By: Mayor ATTEST: ALETHA RAUTENKRANZ, CITY CLERK By: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY By: -3- STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) ss. before me, . Notarv Public, oersonall^ anneared -]\aM/d^ XL *t.oM.//2— . 011 the bfloio of oat , personallv iis.f ac t arv evidence known to me (or proved — to me ;) to be the nersonf^') whose id/ajr^subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me "tfhat (Jiey SxHe/tj2€y executed tjae same in ^isy/h^rr/t^^iBir authorized capacity (y&s] , and that by^nis/h^/th^rir signaturej^sj on the instrument, the personJ^s) , or the entity upon behalf of which the person(p} acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature —CoKorta SanOtogo CountyMrConm Bqsltw Auo 8.2DOD -4- EXHIBIT "A" Page 1 of 1 LOTS 1 THROUGH 77 OF CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 97-01, RANCHO: CARRILLO VILLAGE "H", IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO,. STATE OF CALIFORNIA,-ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. ^, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, • EXHIBIT "B" Page 1 of 2 THE"KNOLL" BOUNDARY Being a portion of Parcel One of Parcel Map No. 1763 in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California according to the map thereof on file in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the most Southeasterly corner of said Parcel One; thence along the Easterly line of said Parcel One North 02°38'00" (North 02°38'58" West record) West 2052.51 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence leaving said Easterly line South 87°22'00" West 250.00 feet; thence North 02°38'00" West 200.00 feet; thence North 60048'06" East 167.71 feet; thence North 02°38'00" West 240.00 feet; thence South 87°22'00" West 450.00 feet; thence North 02°38'00" West 330.00 feet; thence North 42°22'00M East 353.55 feet; thence North 87°22'00" East 300.00 feet to the Easterly line of said Parcel One; thence along said Easterly line South 02°38'00" (South 02°38'58" East record) East 1095.00 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. April 14, 1998 KD:rh\12987.003 OPEN SPACELOT PARCEL J PARCEL MAP NO,J763 TRUE P.O.B. EXHIBIT "B" Page 2 of 2 (THE KNOLL) OPEN SPACE LOT 77 SCALE:-®- l"=200' JN 12987 (Form A) TO: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT RE: PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST Attached are the materials necessary for you to notice CT 97-01/PUD 97-01 - Rancho Carrillo Village H for a public hearing before the City Council. Please notice the item for the council meeting of Thank you. Q? <V February 1?. 1998 Assistant City Manffg* Date City of Carlsbad Planning Department January 22, 1998 David Lother Continental Ranch, Inc. 12636 High Bluff Drive, Suite 300 San Diego, CA 92130 SUBJECT: CT 97-01 Rancho Carrillo Village H Thank you for applying for Land Use Permits in the City of Carlsbad. The Planning Department has reviewed your tentative map, application no. CT 97-01, as to its completeness for processing. COMPLETE 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 effective date of the adoption of the Master Plan Amendment, which was November 28, 1997. 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, Brian Hunter, at (760) 438-1161, extension 4457, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincerely, MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director MJH: bwh:mh c: Gary Wayne Team Leader Project Engineer Bobbie Hoder File Copy Data Entry Planning Aide 2075 Las Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 • (76O) 438-1161 • FAX (760) 438-0894 City of Carlsbad Planning Department PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF DECISION January 15, 1998 Continental Ranch, Inc. 12636 High Bluff Drive, Ste. 300 San Diego, CA 92130 SUBJECT: CT 97-01/PUD 97-01 - RANCHO CARRILLO VILLAGE H At the Planning Commission meeting of January 7, 1998, your application was considered. The Commission voted 7-0 to APPROVE AS AMENDED your request. Some decisions are final at Planning Commission, and others automatically go forward to City Council. If you have any questions regarding the final dispositions of your application, please call the Planning Department at (760) 438-1161. Sincerely, MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director MJH:mh Enclosed: Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4229 and 4230 2O75 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 - (760) 438-1161 - FAX (760) 438-0894 Hofman Planning Associates o o » Planning Project Management Fiscal Analysis MEMORANDUM DATE: December 23, 1997 TO: Brian Hunter, Mike Shirey, Bob Wojcik FROM: Mike Howes SUBJECT: Revisions to Conditions of Approval for CT 97-01 Village H Based on the conversations that we had at our meeting on Friday, December 19, 1997 we would like to request that the following revisions be made to the Conditions of Approval for CT 97-01. Please note that our proposed revisions are in bold type. Condition 17 - Please revise to read as follows: Prior to occupancy of individual units, the applicant shall construct the community theme/noise attenuation walls shown on the Landscape Concept Plan Exhibit, dated January 7, 1997. However, based on the Noise Study prepared by RECON, dated December 5,1997, a Village Theme Wall, per Exhibit 22 of the Rancho Carrillo Master Plan, may be constructed along the rear yards of lots 64-69. Condition 63 - Please revise to read as follows: A private agreement must be executed and recorded with the westerly adjacent (currently Bressi) property owners, indicating acknowledgment and acceptance by both parties that if the Bressi property, immediately adjacent to Rancho Carrillo Village "H", Lot No. 7, develops, this development will gain access through Rancho Carrillo Village "H" and that any future development on the Bressi property will share in the cost of maintaining the streets H-A, H-B & H-E. This agreement shall encumber both the Brace Ranch and Rancho Carrillo Village "H" properties. This agreement shall provide a three year period from the time of tentative map approval for the Brace property to exercise this option. If the Brace property is not developed within this period Village "H" will not be required to provide access and lot 7 may be developed with a single family detached home. 2386 Faraday Avenue • Suite 120 • Carlsbad « CA 92008 ° (619)438-1465 « Fax: (619)438-2443 Condition 64 - Please revise to read as follows: A statement shall be included in the project's Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) putting homebuyers on notice, indicating that future development (if such development occurs) of the Brace property, immediately adjacent to Rancho Carrillo Village "H" Lot No. 7, will gain access through Rancho Carrillo Village H and that any future development on the Brace property will provide their allocable share in the cost of maintaining H-A, H-B & H-E streets. We believe that these revisions to Conditions 63 & 64 and the agreement that will be prepared between the applicant and the owners of the Brace Ranch will adequately address Staffs concerns. As long as this agreement and these Conditions are in place there is no need to require that development on the Brace property annex into the Village H homeowners' association. In addition, the establishment of a mutually acceptable time limit for the exercise of the option to gain access through Village H will eliminate the problem of Lot 7 remaining vacant indefinitely if the Brace property is never developed. Hofman Planning Associates Planning Project Management Fiscal Analysis MEMORANDUM DATE: October 22, 1997 TO: Kris Ryge FROM: Mike Howes; (NC) SUBJECT: 600' OWNERS LIST AND MAILING LABELS FOR VILLAGE H Kris: Enclosed is the 600' radius map, owners list, two sets of mailing labels, postage fee, and guarantee from First American Title Company for CT 97-01, Village H of Rancho Carrillo. These items are being provided for the November 19, 1997 Planning Commission hearing. Rick Engineering has informed me that they have provided Brain Hunter with 10 copies of the site plans and landscape plans, and a reduced copy of the site plan. If you have any questions or need anything else, please give me a call. enclosures cc Dave Lother (w/out enclosures) 2386 Faraday Avenue ° Suite 120 ° Carlsbad ° CA 92008 - (619)438-1465 ° Fax: (619)438-2443 City of Carlsbad Engineering Department June 23, 1997 Mike Howes Hofman Planning Associates 2386 Faraday Avenue Suite 120 Carlsbad CA 92008 CT 97-01, PUD 97-01: RANCHO CARRILLO VILLAGE "H" SECOND ISSUES STATEMENT Engineering Department staff have completed a second review of the above-referenced project for application completeness and Engineering Issues of Concern. Based on a planning department determination that no projects within Rancho Carrillo shall be found to be complete until the Master Plan Amendment is scheduled for a hearing (Planning Director correspondence of March 19, 1997), this tentative map is still incomplete. Since the project was previously found to be incomplete, as previously indicated, not all of the potential engineering issues of concern were investigated as part of the project's initial staff review. However, at this time, the project has been reviewed for engineering issues of concern. Engineering issues which must be resolved prior to staff making a determination on the project are as follows: Land Title and Mapping: 1. Thank you for supplying the Rancho Carrillo Easement Exhibit. Half of staffs request was implemented. What is missing, are the future dispositions of these easements. Rather than indicate the future dispositions for the entire exhibit, however, just indicate the future disposition of the easements associated with Village "H" (include the future dispositions for Village's A-D also), in accordance with the following Preliminary Title Report (PR) Schedule "B" items: 5, 11, 15, 18, 38, 70 & 73. Additionally, PR item's 36 & 41 were not indicated on the exhibit. Please show these two easements, and if applicable, indicate the future dispositions. Finally, there were errors on some of the easement information. Please revise in accordance with the following: • PR item 25 - Document No. is 86-058612, not, 058611. • PR item 38 - Document Information is: Date 11/21/51, Bk. 4297, Pg. 314; not, Date 10/2/40, Bk. 1068, Pg. 496. • PR item 53/54 - Document No. is 86-058612, not, 058611. 2. Revise the "General Design" notes on sheet 1 of 6, as follows: • Note 1 - Delete: "No additional improvements proposed with this map." • Note 8 -'Add: "to the satisfaction of the City Engineer" to the end of the sentence. • Note 12 - Add: "to the satisfaction of the City Engineer" to the end of the sentence. 3. As previously requested, increase the lot frontage for Lot 43 to a minimum width of 25'. 2075 Las Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 - (619) 438-1161 - FAX (619) 438-O894 CT 97-01, PUD 97-01: RANCHO CARRILLO VILLAGE "H" SECOND ISSUES STATEMENT M. HOWES LETTER; JUNE 23,1997 Drainage and Sewer; 1. Label the typical lot drainage diagram on sheet 2 of 6 as City Standard GS-15. Also, the 5 ft. minimum dimension from the face of the structure to the flow line has been removed. Add this dimension back to the plan view of the typical lot drainage diagram. 2. In accordance with Item No. 1 above, also indicate the 5 ft. minimum dimension from the face of the structure to the flow line on the Building Envelope plan view on Sheet 1 of 5 of the Housing Product Plotting plan. 3. The sewer and storm drain located at proposed lot 34, which travels off-site through Village "J", must be indicated as public or private. Since the proposed storm drain is carrying "private" runoff, it must be private. Regarding the sewer, however, even though this sewer is for a private development, the determination has been made by the Carlsbad Municipal Water District (CMWD) that almost all sewer systems within the City shall be public. Therefore, this proposed sewer line shall be public, with a public easement over it. Please revise by indicating a 20' public sewer easement; also, indicate that the storm drain, which is being shown within this easement, is a private storm drain. Indicate both of these on the tentative map. Traffic and Circulation: 1.The proposed tentative map (TM) street widths still do not match the street widths as indicated in the proposed Master Plan Amendment (MP (A)), in accordance with the following: a) TM Village Entry: b) MP (A) Street "P": c) TM/MP (A) Village Entry Requirement: d) TM proposed Street's "H-B/H-C": e) MP (A) Street "L": f) TM proposed Street's "H-D/H-E": g) MP (A) Street "O": 20' ingress, 8' raised median, 16' egress 16' ingress, 8' raised median, 16' egress 20' ingress, 8' raised median, 19' egress (minimums). Sidewalks are being indicated at 5'. Staff recommends 5.5' sidewalks. 46' right of way (row), 5' sidewalks (s/w) *47' right of way, 5.5' sidewalks (*Again, staff recommends 5.5' sidewalks.) 39' row, 5' s/w, 2' parkway *39' row, 5' s/w, 2' parkway (*Staff recommends 5.5' sidewalks and 3' parkways.) 2.Regarding MP (A) Street "O", Delete the statement "Dimension may increase variably for private streets only." Replace this statement with 39' minimum for the right of way, and, 2' minimum for the parkway. (However again, staff recommends 3' minimums for the parkway areas.) CT 97-01, PUD 97-01: RANCHO CARRILLO VILLAGE "H" SECOND ISSUES STATEMENT M. HOWES LETTER; JUNE 23,1997 3. Master Plan Amendment Circulation Exhibit, Street "G," is being shown with a curb to curb width of 36'. Even though staff has not completed a second review of Village's "A-D," since the street sections for these villages are included on the MP (A) Circulation Exhibit, and, since the developer is anxious to have the MP (A) scheduled, revisions to MP (A) Street "G" must also be made. In accordance with City Standards, streets that do not end in a cul-de-sac must have a right of way and curb to curb minimum width of 60' and 40', respectively. 4. A typical street section for proposed Street H-A has not been shown on the tentative map. Show this typical section and make sure that it corresponds to the Master Plan Amendment Circulation Exhibit. 5. On the MP (A) Circulation Exhibit, show and label a street section for the 32' wide street at Lot 19. Again, please make sure that it corresponds to the dimensions on the Village "H" tentative map. 6. As has been previously discussed, access to developable property in Zone 17 must be considered, and, indicated on this tentative map. Therefore, at a minimum, a 36' wide curb to curb street with 5.5' sidewalks on both sides must be provided to the Bressi property boundary. This street must be indicated as potential future access to the Bressi property on the tentative map and on the Master Plan Amendment Circulation Exhibit. 7. As previously indicated, the 20' paved section, to access Lot 27 (and the preliminary dwelling unit design for Lot 27), is unacceptable. This street segment and unit must be redesigned so that vehicles can maneuver at Lot 27. Additionally, as referenced above, this street segment is a potential connection point to the Bressi property and must meet the minimum width requirements as indicated, and, be shown on the TM and MP (A) Circulation Exhibit. 8. The stopping sight distance sight line of 150' which is now being shown at the intersection of Street H-B with Street H-C is potentially acceptable (since this is the minimum for a private street). Staff recommends, however, that a stopping sight distance of 200' minimum be utilized. Also, please indicate a corner sight distance sight line of 660' at the intersection of the project entrance with Melrose Drive. Show both of the above sight lines (150' or 200' & 660') on the landscape plans also. 9. Conduct a traffic signal warrant analysis at the intersection of the project's entrance with Melrose Drive. Include the trip generation increase for the developable portion of the Bressi property. Conduct this warrant analysis for year 2000 and Build-out. Soils and Geology: 1. Even though mass grading is already in work additional grading will be conducted for this village. Therefore, as previously discussed, the soils report, which was submitted at second check, must have an update letter. It states in the soils report that the report is only valid for a period of three (3) years (until November 1995). CT 97-01, PUD 97-01: RANCHO CARRILLO VILLAGE "H" SECOND ISSUES STATEMENT M. HOWES LETTER; JUNE 23,1997 Miscellaneous: 1. Please be advised, that prior to recordation of any final map for this project, a private agreement must be executed with the Bressi property owners, and recorded so that the agreement encumbers (i.e., runs with) both the Bressi and Village "H" properties, indicating acknowledgment and acceptance by both parties that the Bressi property will gain access through Rancho Carrillo Village "H", and, that any future development on the Bressi property will become part of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Homeowners Association of Village "H". 2. Please be advised, that in accordance with Item No. 1 above, prior to recordation of any final map for this project, language must be included in the project's Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions (CC&R's) putting home buyers on notice and stating that future development of the Bressi property will gain access through Ranch Carrillo Village "H", and, that any future development on the Bressi property will become part of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Homeowners Association of Village "H". Again, the project is technically considered to be incomplete. As a courtesy to the developer, however, staff has reviewed most of the engineering issues at this time. Please be advised, staff is trying to work with the developer and their consultants on this project and it would help if plans are returned with all requested revisions addressed. Due to heavy work loads, processing of these plans has taken somewhat longer than normal, and staff is aware of this. However, diligent processing of this project on the part of the developer and their consultants (i.e., plans being revised, issues being resolved and not overlooked) will also go a long way to help meet the developers time schedules. A red-lined check print is attached for your use in making the requested revisions. This check print must be returned with your re-submittal to facilitate continued staff review. If you have any questions, please contact me at telephone 760/438-1161, extension 4388. MICHAEL J. Sh Associate Engineer - Land Development Attachment c: Principal Civil Engineer - Land Development Associate Engineer - K. Quon Senior Planner - B. Hunter Robert Wilkinson David Lother Rick Planning Group Continental Homes 5620 Friars Road 12636 High Bluff Drive Suite 300 San Diego CA 92110-2596 San Diego CA 92130 City of Carlsbad Engineering Department April 23, 1997 ROBERT E WILKINSON RICK PLANNING GROUP 5620 FRIARS ROAD SAN DIEGO CA 92110-2596 CT 97-01, PUD 97-01: RANCHO CARRILLO VILLAGE "H" CIRCULATION REVIEW Pursuant to your request, engineering department staff have conducted a preliminary review of the above-referenced project's revised internal street circulation system. As indicated in the engineering department staff's initial issue letter, a major issue associated with this proposed project is the connection of public access to developable property within LFMP Zone 17. Please be advised, this is still a major issue with both engineering and fire department staff and this connection will be required. This requirement may necessitate a redesign of portions of Village "H"; therefore, comments on various segments of the street system, as you requested, may not be applicable. For your information, however, staff has reviewed the project as currently is proposed. If a redesign is required, staffs comments can then be utilized as guidelines for configuring the circulation system. Staff reviewed the 20 scale street system sheets and the 40 scale preliminary dwelling unit 8.5" x 11" pages that you provided to determine if there are any operational deficiencies associated with the currently proposed circulation patterns. Preliminary engineering issues have been identified in accordance with each "cul-de-sac/hammerhead" area and are referenced below: PROJECT ENTRY: 1. As indicated above, this roadway will have to be public to provide access to the Bressi property. At a minimum, the street section must be designed to the approved Rancho Carrillo Master Plan (i.e., 76' right of way width/56' curb to curb width, with an 18' raised median) and must be extended, at a minimum, to the intersection of Street H-A with Street H-B. This "extended" design for Street H-A now negates the requirement for secondary access at proposed Lot 19. If the developer still wishes to have access to this area of the project (i.e., in close proximity to Melrose Drive), then a private street, which is not gated, can be provided at Lot 19. This street, however, must have a minimum width of 30' H/C STREET CUL-DE-SAC TERMINUS (a). LOT'S 51-54: 1. In accordance with the current plan, the 36' (curb to curb) wide street and the 27' (curb to curb) reduced radius cul-de-sac is potentially acceptable. 2. Increase the lot frontage for Lot 53 to a minimum width of 25'; also, the property lines for Lot 53 must intersect the cul-de-sac perpendicularly. 2075 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92OO9-1576 - (619) 438-1161 • FAX (619) 438-O894 CT 97-01, PUD 97-01 :RA CIRCULATION REVIEW R. WILKINSON LETTER; APRIL 23,1997 O CARRILLO VILLAGE "H"PAGE: 2 H/B STREET CUL-DE-SAC TERMINUS @ LOT'S 59. 72-73; 1. In accordance with the current plan, the 32' (curb to curb) wide street and the 27' (curb to curb) reduced radius cul-de-sac is potentially acceptable. 2. Increase the lot frontage for Lot 73 to a minimum width of 25'; also, the property lines for Lot 73 must intersect the cul-de-sac perpendicularly. H/C STREET CUL-DE-SAC TERMINUS @ LOTS 42-44: 1. In accordance with the current plan, the 36' (curb to curb) wide street and the 38' (curb to curb) radius cul-de-sac is potentially acceptable. 2. Increase the lot frontage for Lot 43 to a minimum width of 25'. H/D STREET HAMMERHEAD TERMINUS @ LOT'S 34-35; 1. In accordance with the current plan, the 32' (curb to curb) wide street and the dual 90° hammerhead type turn is potentially acceptable. H/D STREET HAMMERHEAD TERMINUS (5) LOT'S 27-29; 1. The 20' pavement width and 90° hammerhead turn between Lot's 28 and 29 is potentially acceptable. However, the 20' paved section, to access Lot 27, and, the preliminary dwelling unit design, for Lot 27, is unacceptable. This street segment and unit must be redesigned so that vehicles can maneuver at Lot 27. Additionally, as referenced above, this street segment is a potential connection point to the Bressi property and must meet the minimum width requirements. Please again review engineering department staff, initial issue letter Item No. 7, regarding "right of way/curb to curb" street, and, sidewalk widths. Any differences to the approved Master Plan must be justified by the developer. One final item which must be taken into account when designing the project is sight distance sight lines. This item was not investigated at initial submittal because the application was deemed incomplete. As a courtesy during this review, staff investigated this item. The intersections of Street H-B with Street H-C, and Street H-A with Street H-D must be reviewed. A minimum of 330' of "corner" sight distance must be achieved. If you have any questions, please contact me at telephone 760/438-1 161 , extension 4388. MICHAEL J. Sh Associate Engineer - Land Use Review Attachment c: Principal Civil Engineer - Land Development Associate Engineer- K. Quon Senior Planner- B. Hunter Fire Marshall - M. Smith David Lother - Continental Homes Mike Howes - Hofman Planning Hofman Planning Associates Planning Project Management Fiscal Analysis April 16, 1997 Mike Shirey 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, Ca. 92009 RE: RANCHO CARRILLO - VILLAGE H - ACCESS TO ZONE 17 Dear Mike: This letter is in response to issue 8.a of the March 13, 1997 Incomplete Letter for Village H: 8. a. Public access to developable property in Zone 17 must be considered, and indicated on this tentative map (this would require at least one dedicated public street to pass through the development) Continental Homes believes that they should not be required to provide this connection for the following reasons: 1. Village H is being developed as a gate guarded private community served by private streets. Village H has always been intended to be developed as a gate guarded private community. Providing a public street to property outside of the boundaries of the Master Plan would destroy the integrity of this community. 2. Continental Homes plans to develop Village H as one of the first phases of the Rancho Carrillo Master Plan. No one knows when or if the adjacent portion of the Bressi Ranch property will be developed and if the development that would be proposed on it would be compatible with that in Village H. 3. The City of Carlsbad's Habitat Management Program identifies a major north- south wildlife corridor through the portion of the Bressi Ranch adjacent to Village H. It does not seem reasonable to provide access for future development into an area that is designated as a wildlife corridor. 2386 Faradcy Avenue • Suite 120 • Carlsbad • CA -2003 • (619) 438-1465 • Fax: (619)438-2443 4. Continental Homes also believes that the City does not have the legal authority to require that they provide access to this portion of the Bressi Ranch property. There is no legal requirement that every potentially developable portion of a large undeveloped parcel be accessible. It is an unfair burden on Continental Homes to be required to provide an access to a potentially developable site that will have a negative impact on the development plans for their property. In addition, staff should consider that this requirement could establish an undesirable precedent from a public policy standpoint. Based on the above, Continental Homes believes that the provision of access from Village H to the adjacent Bressi Ranch property should not be a requirement of this tentative map. We look forward to the opportunity to discuss this issue with you in the future. Sincerely, Mike Howes cc Brian Hunter Bob Wojcik Dave Lother City of Carlsbad Planning Department March 19, 1997 David Lother Continental Ranch, Inc. 12636 High Bluff Drive Suite 300 San Diego, CA 92130 SUBJECT: CT 97-01/PUD 97-01 - RANCHO CARRILLO VILLAGE H Thank you for applying for Land Use Permits in the City of Carlsbad. The Planning Department has reviewed your tentative tract map and planned development, application CT 97-01 and PUD 97-01, as to its completeness for processing. The application is incomplete, as submitted. 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, Jan. 29, 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, Brian Hunter, at (619) 438-1161, extension 4457, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincerely, MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director MJH:BH:kr c: Gary Wayne Mike Shirey Bobbie Hoder File Copy Data Entry Planning Aide 2075 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92OO9-1576 • (619) 438-1161 • FAX (G19) 438-O894 LIST OF ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION No. CT 97-01/PUD 97-01 Planning: 1. The application is dependent upon a General Plan Amendment and Master Plan Amendment which are legislative acts with only limited accessibility to the discretionary review calendar. The application will be held incomplete until such time as a hearing date for the General Plan Amendment and Master Plan Amendment is scheduled. The Planning Department concurs with the Engineering comments. Engineering: 1. A legal description for the property, nor, a high lighted copy of a map indicating the parcels was submitted with the Preliminary Title Report (PR). Also, the tentative map does not indicate the complete property boundary. All bearings and distances of the subdivision boundary, in accordance with the legal description in the PR, must be shown; and, the legal description , once submitted, must be able to be followed and identified on the tentative map. 2. In accordance with Item No. 1 above, the same PR was submitted for Villages "A-D". What proposed project is this PR for? If it is for both of them, then the correct property boundary must be clearly delineated in the PR, and, on the tentative maps. 3. Please indicate all easements, with the recordation number and date, in accordance with the PR, and indicate the future disposition of these easements either in plan view adjacent to the easement information, or, as an easement disposition chart. The easement item numbers are: 5, 11, 15, 18, 19, 20, 21, 25, 27, 28, 30, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 40, 41, 42, 43, 45, 48, 53, 54, 58, 60, 65, 66, 67, 68, 70, and 73. Staff realizes that some of these easements are redundant, however, they do affect different parcels; so, therefore, they must all be accounted for. 4. Please indicate under the grading notes, of the General Notes, the cubic yards/acre of proposed project specific grading. The acceptable range for the amount of grading is from 0-7,999 cubic yards/acre. 5. Under the General Notes, please separate the grading quantities as follows: a) Cubic yards of mass grading for this parcel; b) Cubic yards of project specific grading, and; c) Cubic yards of assessment district street grading, for this parcel. 6. Is the 10% (Typical) note, along the "left" property line for the GS-15 Typical Lot Drainage City Standard on sheet 2 of 6 correct? Shouldn't this be 10 feet? 7. The proposed street widths do not match the street widths as indicated in the approved master plan, in accordance with the following: Proposed Street D 39' Right of Way/32' curb to curb MP Streets 0, P, and L 41 732', 45736', 47736', respectively Proposed Streets A, B, and C 46736' MP Street L 47732' Proposed Village Entry 5071 6'(lane)/18'(raised median)/1 6'(lane) MP Village Entry 76756' (18' raised median) Additionally, the sidewalks in the approved master plan are 5.5' wide, from the face of curb to the back of the sidewalk. The proposed sidewalks are only being shown as 5' wide. Also, on single loaded streets, the parkway in the master plan is 3.5' wide, and this project proposes a 2' wide parkway. Please revise. 8. Two major issues exist regarding conformance of the proposed street system with the approved master plan, as follows: a) Public access to developable property in Zone 17 must be considered, and indicated on this tentative map (this would require at least one dedicated public street to pass through the development); b) The proposed "flag lot private drives" do not conform to the master plan, and the "flag lots" do not conform to the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Standard cul-de-sacs must be indicated at the terminus of all proposed streets. Additionally, there are operational issues associated with this proposed design (e.g., trucks, emergency vehicles, trash, moving vans, delivery vehicles will not be able to circulate in this reduced street width area). City standards preclude backing out of an area that has a length greater than 1 50'. Adequate parking for guests will not be able to be provided. 9. Please show the termination points of the proposed off-site sewer and storm drains. Also, "indicate the end treatments of all proposed storm drain out- falls. 10. Please submit a hydrology study for this proposed project. If you are planning on submitting the Rancho Carrillo Hydrology Report, it must be updated to include the development of this site. 11. Please submit a soils/geo-technical study for this proposed project. If you are planning on submitting the Rancho Carrillo Soils/Geo-technical Report, it must be update to include the development of this site. 12. Since the potential exists for the redesign of this project due to the project not meeting master plan street design criteria, engineering department staff have not investigated any engineering issues of concern at this time. Engineering issues will be investigated upon re-submittal of the project, once the "completeness" items are addressed. 13. Attached is a red-line check print of the project for the applicants use in making the requested revisions. This check print must be returned with the project revisions to facilitate continued staff review. MEMORANDUM February 26,1997 TO: SENIOR PLANNER - BRIAN HUNTER From: Associate Engineer - Land Use Review VIA: Principal Civil Engineer - Land Use Review CT 97-01, PUD 97-01: RANCHO CARRILLO VILLAGE "H" COMPLETENESS REVIEW AND INITIAL ISSUES STATEMENT Engineering Department staff have completed a review of the above-referenced project for application completeness. The application and plans submitted for this proposed project are currently incomplete and unsuitable for further review due to the following incomplete items: 1. A legal description for the property, nor, a high lighted copy of a map indicating the parcels was submitted with the Preliminary Title Report (PR). Also , the tentative map does not indicate the complete property boundary. All bearings and distances of the subdivision boundary, in accordance with the legal description in the PR, must be shown; and, the legal description, once submitted, must be able to be followed and identified on the tentative map. 2. In accordance with Item No. 1 above, the same PR was submitted for Villages "A-D". Which proposed project is this PR for? If it is for both of them, then the correct property boundary must be clearly delineated in the PR, and, on the tentative maps. 3. Please indicate aN easements, with the recordation number and date, in accordance with the PR, and indicate the future disposition of these easements either in plan view adjacent to the easement information, or, as an easement disposition chart. The easement item numbers are: 5,11,15,18,19,20,21,25,27,28,30,33,34,35,36,37,38,40,41,42,43,45,48,53,54,58, 60,65,66,67,68,70 & 73. Staff realizes that some of these easements are redundant, however, they do . affect different parcels; so, therefore, they all must be accounted for. 4. Please indicate under the grading notes, of the General Notes, the cubic yards/acre of proposed project specific grading. The acceptable range for the amount of grading is from 0 - 7,999 cubic yards/acre. CT 97-01, PUD 97-01: RANCHO CARRILLO VILLAGE "H" PAGE: 2 COMPLETENESS REVIEW BRIAN HUNTER MEMO; FEBRUARY 26, 1997 5. Under the General Notes, please separate the grading quantities as follows: a) Cubic Yards of mass grading for this parcel; b) cubic yards of project specific grading, and; c) cubic yards of assessment district street grading, for this parcel. 6. Is the 10% (Typical) note, along the "left" property line, for the GS-15 Typical Lot Drainage City Standard on sheet 2 of 6 correct? Shouldn't this be 10 feet? 7. The proposed street widths do not match the street widths as indicated in the approved master plan, in accordance with the following: a) Proposed Street "D": 39' Right of Way/32' Curb-to-curb, b) MP Street's "O,P,L": 41732', 45736', 47736', respectively; c) Proposed Street's "A,B,C": 46736', d) MP Street's "L": 47732'; e) Proposed Village Entry: 50716'(lane)18'(raised median)16'(lane), f) MP Village Entry: 76756' (with an 18' raised median). Additionally, the sidewalks in the approved master plan are 5.5' wide, from the face-of-curb to the back of the sidewalk. The proposed sidewalks are only being shown as 5' wide. Also, on single loaded streets, the parkway in the master plan is 3.5' wide, and this project proposes a 2' wide parkway. Please revise. 8. Two major issues exist regarding conformance of the proposed street system with the approved master plan, as follows: a) Public access to developable property in Zone 17 must be considered, and, indicated on this tentative map (this would require at least one dedicated public street to pass through the development); b) the proposed "flag lot private drives" do not conform to the master plan, and the "flag lots" do not conform to the Carlsbad Code (CMC). Standard cul-de-sacs must be indicated at the terminus of all proposed streets. Additionally, there are operational issues associated with this proposed design (e.g., trucks <emergency vehicles, trash, moving vans, delivery vehicles> will not be able to circulate in this reduced street width area, City standards preclude backing out of an area that has a length greater than 150', adequate parking for guests will not be able to be provided). 9. Please show the termination points of the proposed off-site sewer and storm drains. Also, indicate the end treatments of all proposed storm drain out-falls. CT 97-01, PUD 97-01: RANCHO CARRILLO VILLAGE "H" PAGE: 3 COMPLETENESS REVIEW BRIAN HUNTER MEMO; FEBRUARY 26, 1997 10. Please submit a hydrology study for this proposed project. If you are planning on submitting the Rancho Carrillo Hydrology Report, it must be updated to include the development of this site. 11. Please submit a soils/geo-technical study for this proposed project. If you are planning on submitting the Rancho Carrillo Soils/Geo-technical Report, it must be updated to include the development of this site. 12. Since the potential exists for the redesign of this project, due to the project not meeting master plan street design criteria, engineering department staff have not investigated any engineering issues of concern at this time. Engineering issues will be investigated upon re-submittal of the project, once the "completeness" items are addressed. 13. Attached is a red-lined check print of the project for the applicants use in making the requested revisions. This check print must be returned with the project revisions to facilitate continued staff review. If you or the applicant have any questions, please either see or contact me at extension 4388. MICHAEL J.SHIREY Associate Engineer - LaTid Use Review Attachment To: Brand! King Cc: Brian Hunter From: Mike Shirey Subject: CT 97-01, CT 97-02: CARRILLO A,B,C,D,& H Date: 2/25/97 Time: 7:22AM Brandi, I'm the engineer working on the above-referenced projects. When I received my copy of the application package there were not any studies (i.e., traffic, soils, etc.) or Title Reports in with the materials. I need to know if these items were submitted to do my "completeness" check. Since Brian is out, and I've heard that you make-up the files, could you please see if this information was submitted and make sure that I receive the info. I need to make my completeness determination this week, so I need this information, if it was submitted. If your not sure about this stuff, I'll wait until Brian is back, but I just thought that I would check with you. I'm at a training seminar until this afternoon, so I'll chek my E-mail then. Thanks! Mike S... Z J2* V ycv \