No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRP 91-09; Army & Navy Academy Master Plan; Redevelopment Permits (RP) (2)City of Carlsbad Planning Departnnent March 3, 1994 David Sheegog Thomas P. Cox Architect 3242 Halladay, Suite 204 Santa Ana, CA 92705 SUBJECT: WFTHDRAWAL OF ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY APPUCATIONS RP 91-9 AND CDP 91-4 Dear David: The City has accepted your withdrawal of the above applications for the Army and Navy Academy Master Site Development Plan. The remaining fees from those applications have been credited toward the new applications you submitted on March 1, 1994 as we agreed. If you have any questions please contact me at (619) 438-1161, extension 4446. Sincerely, DON NEU Senior Planner c: File Copy ^ Data Entry DN:vd RP919.wtd 2075 Las Palmas Drive • Carlsbad. California 92009-1576 • (619) 438-1161 ItimmlAn n n c H I I I [ I March 1, 1994 Mr. Don Neu City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 Dear Don, Today 1 submitted a second application for the Army & Navy Academy Master plan. Per your request, we would like to retract the former applications RP919 and CDP914 so that fees paid toward these applications can be credited toward the new application as we discussed this afternoon. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, David Sheegog Project Manager cc: Dr. Fred Heinle Mc. Alan O'Kain DS.lns mnallailai Suite m Santa Ana, i:aliloiiiia 3nil5 Piione: JU.55l4m far. Jim.ma City of Carlsbad Planning Departnnent October 19, 1993 Man N. O'Kain Army and Navy Academy Post Office Box 3000 Carlsbad, CA 92018-0998 SUBJECT: ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY MASTER SITE PLAN Dear Mr. O'Kain: I have received your response to my September 22,1993 letter concerning the process for the Army and Navy Academy Master Site Plan application. It appears that there may be a misunderstanding regarding the direction provided in the September letter as it relates to the submittal of a new application and fees. Because of the length of time that the application has been on file and remained incomplete the City can deem it to be automatically withdrawn according to the Carlsbad Municipal Code. However, City Staff believes it is in die best interest of the academy for the applications to be withdrawn and resubmitted. This request is also supported by statements made by your architect, Tom Cox, indicating that the plans have been significantiy redesigned. The City is able to refund fifty percent of the application fees paid. The length of time it takes for your application to be processed will depend on the completeness of the submittal, the issues identified with the proposal, and your consultant's ability to respond to and resolve the issues which are identified. Because the applications are incomplete there is no time savings realized by retaining these applications versus submitting new applications. The City's position remains that if the plans have been significantiy redesigned it is appropriate to submit new applications and fees. Please contact me at (619) 438-1161, extension 4446 if you have any questions. I am also available to meet with you to discuss this further. DON NEU Senior Planner c: Marty Orenyak, Community Development Director Tom Cox, Architect DN:vd A&NMP.ltr 2075 Las Palmas Drive • Carlsbad, California 92009-1576 • (619)438-1161 ^ Second Half Century Armj and Navj AcaJemj POST OFFICE BOX 3000 CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008-0998 October 8, 1993 Mr. Don Neu Senior Planner CITY OF CARLSBAD 2075 Las Palmas Carlsbad, Califomia 92009-1576 Re: Army and Naw Academy Master Site Plan Dear Mr. Neu: The Academy is in receipt of your letter dated September 22, 1993, requesting a withdrawal of the Master Site Plan ("Plan") and a re-submittal of the Plan with new fees. The Academy strongly disagrees with the additional fees and the requirement for re- submittal for the following reasons: 1. Approximately lYi years was lost (at great expense to the Academy) negotiating with the Redevelopment Agency between 1989 and 1991. An agreement in principal was finally reached vdth the Redevelopment Agency only to be completely retracted after the appointment of a new Director. (See the letter from Evan Becker dated February 3, 1993.) 2. The February 1993 letter of retraction (which was promised in two weeks and took almost 3 months to receive) caused a complete re-evaluation of the Plan from the schoors point of view (at further great expense to the Academy). 3. In late 1991, although the Plan was at a point of being re-submitted as a "complete" document responding to all the original review issues and otherwise then satisfactory to the Redevelopment Agency, the City Manager, for reasons still unclear to us, put a hold on the Plan while the new dormitory building was processed. d) October 8, 1993 Mr. Don Neu Page 2 For the past 2^2 years, the Academy has followed the prescribed course set forth by the City of Carlsbad and the Redevelopment Agency, only to find itself back at the very begiiming of the Plan process. To be fair and to avoid the year-long "first look" typical for "new" submittals, we would appreciate it if you would accept the newly revised Plan as a revision with no increased fees for the continued processing of the Plan. Again, we wish to proceed with all due haste toward a successful completion of our project. Sincerely, CADEMY Man N. O'Kain Secretary AOK/thn cc: Dr. Fred Heinle, President Thomas Cox, AIA Mr. Marty Orenyak, City Manager AOK7043 City of Carlsbad Planning Department September 22, 1993 Thomas P. Cox, AIA 3242 Halladay, Suite 204 Santa Ana, CA 92705 SUBJECT: ARMY NAVY ACADEMY STREET IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT DEADLINE EXTENSION AND MASTER SITE PLAN APPLICATIONS Dear Tom: Included with this letter is an extension agreement form for the Cypress Avenue improvements which is to be properly executed, notarized and retumed to Lynn Tme of the Engineering Department Inspection Division. As discussed, the agreement will extend the current deadline for constmction of the Cypress Avenue improvements by another six months. This will allow time for the Army Navy Academy to process the street vacation issue through the Master Site Plan process. At the end of the six month period we will again review the matter to determine if another extension is warranted and if so how much additional time will be needed to completely resolve the street vacation issue. The present redevelopment permit and coastal development permit applications on file for the master site plan shotild be withdrawn. The applications were submitted on November 21,1991 and deemed incomplete on December 19,1991. The agreement between you and the City was that the time during which the separate Crean and Atkinson Hall Dormitory applications were being processed would put the master site plan on hold. This was to stop the 6 month clock so that the application would not be deemed withdrawn while time could not be devoted to the application. Once the dormitory was approved the clock would start miming again. The dormitory was approved on Jime 3,1992. On Febmary 9,1993 you were sent a letter signed by Evan Becker indicating the City's position on a ntunber of issues regarding the project. It has been one year and three months since the dormitory was approved and 7 months since the City's most recent letter on the project. No submittals have been made during this time. In addition, you have indicated that the plan has changed significantly from the original submittal. 2075 Las Palmas Drive • Carlsbad, California 92009-1576 • (619) 438-1161 Thomas P. Cox, AIA September 22, 1993 Page 2 For these reasons city staff recommends that new applications and fees be submitted. The City will refund to you a portion of the original application fees paid. The amoimt of the refund is determined based upon the staff time spent to date on the review and processing of the applications. A preliminary plan review is recommended to provide you with direction on the new design prior to more detailed plans being developed. Should you have any questions conceming the extension agreement please contact Dave Hauser at 438-1161, extension 4362. Questions conceming the master site plan application process should be directed to me at 438-1161, extension 4446. Sincerely, DON NEU Senior Planner Attachment c: Marty Orenyak Dave Hauser Evan Becker Debbie Fountain Lynn Tme K:\ADMIN\CORR\r)hfEU\ARMYNVY.LTR C?ttv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department February 3, 1993 TOM COX yoo MUSSER & COX ARCHITECTS ^ 3184-B AIRWAY AVENUE COSTA MESA, CA. 92 626 RE: ARMY NAVY ACADEMY MASTER SITE PLAN Dear Tom: It is my understanding that you met with Don Neu, of the Planning Department, and requested a letter outlining the Carlsbad Redevelopment Agency's current position on the various issues summarized in the previous Director's (Kathy Graham) letter dated February 21, 1992. We appreciate your patience and continued cooperation in working with the Redevelopment Agency on your proposed Master Plan for the Army Navy Academy. The following represents the Agency's current position on the listed issues: 1. PEDESTRIANIZATION OF CYPRESS STREET - The Redevelopment Agency has no objection to this action. However, the Engineering Department cannot support the closure of the street at this time. Without a traffic study that reviews the present traffic circulation and reviews what affects the closure would have on traffic and emergency services now and in the future, we can form no more specific direction than the following: It looks like something Engineering would not support. 2. JOINT USE OF GYMNASIUM AS FUTURE THEATER - After further consideration of this issue, it is apparent that joint use of the theater is not necessary for Redevelopment purposes. The Village Redevelopment Plan prohibits condemnation of public agency property and we currently do not have funds available to assist with renovation of the theater. Therefore, it is not likely that we can provide any assistance which might encourage you to make this facility available for joint public/private use. We would encourage you to use this facility in the manner which best addresses the needs of the Army Navy Academy. 3. RED APPLE INN - No change in position. 4. RECREATION BUILDING ON OCEAN STREET - No change in position. 5. VIEW CORRIDOR TO THE OCEAN - No change in position. 6. VEHICLE ACCESS FROM CARLSBAD BOULEVARD TO ACADEMY - No change in redevelopment position on this issue. However, the 2965 Roosevelt St., Suite B • Carlsbad, California 92008-2389 • (619)434-2810/2811 ^ (9 Engineering Department will not support an additional access/driveway to the Academy from the Boulevard. 7. STATE-OWNED PROPERTY (BEECH AND CARLSBAD BOULEVARD) - The previous discussion involved the City/Agency's assistance in acguiring the state-owned property on corner of Beech and Carlsbad Boulevard in exchange for joint use of a proposed new theater and parking structure. As stated previously, the Agency does not have the power to condemn the property nor any funds to assist in the acquisition. Therefore, we would not be able to assist in the Army Navy Academy's efforts to purchase the noted site. 8. NEW PARKING AREA/STRUCTURE - We have changed our position on the joint use of the parking structure. We still agree that the proposed new parking area is very desirable, and may be necessary, to adequately provide for parking for the Academy, the athletic fields and new theater. However, we no longer wish to participate in the construction of a parking structure to use for public parking purposes. The site for the proposed parking lot is not at a location which would be beneficial to the Village as a whole. Therefore, we encourage you to use the parking lot for purposes which best meet the needs of the Army Navy Academy. 9. LINEAR PARK ALONG RAILROAD FROM BEECH TO BUENA VISTA LAGOON - We still support the idea of developing a linear park along the railroad right-of-way. With the impending construction of the new Transit Center at Grand Avenue and implementation of the Commuter Rail System, beautification of the railroad right-of-way is very desirable. The issue of linear parks along the railroad right-of-way has been discussed and generally supported by the Village Redevelopment Area Master Plan Advisory Committee. Therefore, we will continue to support inclusion of a linear park in the Army Navy Academy Master Plan. 10. UNDERGROUNDING OF UTILITIES - No change in position. 11. CYPRESS AND DEL MAR RIGHT-OF-WAY PROBLEMS - No change in position. 12. PROJECT PROCESSING - We believe that Don Neu is processing this project in a highly acceptable manner. Therefore, we do not believe it is necessary for Redevelopment Staff to "chaperon" this project through the processing system. 13. DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - Based on the fact that we no longer believe the joint use facilities are desirable and/or necessary for redevelopment purposes and, in fact, the Redevelopment Agency can provide no financial assistance to the Army Navy Academy for this project, a disposition and development agreement is not required or needed. Processing of the Master Plan can continue without any further action by the Redevelopment Department. The Carlsbad Redevelopment Agency continues to be supportive of the Master Site Plan for the Army Navy Academy. The efforts to upgrade existing buildings will be beneficial to both the Academy and the Village Redevelopment Area as a whole. If you have any questions or comments regarding this correspondence, please contact my office at 434-2815 or Debbie Fountain, of my staff, at 434-2935. Sincerely, EVAN E. BECKER Housing and Redevelopment Director c: Community Development Director Senior Planner, Don Neu t^.-^^ y MARCH 9, 1992 TO: DON NEU, SENIOR PLANNER FROM: DEBBIE FOUNTAIN, ACTING HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ARMY NAVY ACADEMY APPLICATION FOR CREAN/ATKINSON HALL (RP 92- 4/CDP 92-3) Attached please find a copy of the letter forwarded to the Community Development Director regarding processing of the previous Master Site Plan and the Crean/Atkinson Hall (dormitory) application for the Army Navy Academy. This letter was requested by the Community Development Director as an indication that the applicant understands that processing of the Master Site Plan application may be delayed to provide "priority" processing for the dormitory application. The Housing and Redevelopment Department is supportive of the Army Navy Academy's efforts to upgrade the campus through renovation of existing buildings and/or new construction to replace obsolete buildings. We have no problems with the applications for redevelopment (92-4) and coastal development (92-3) permits submitted by Musser & Cox Architects on February 21, 1992. If you have any comments and/or questions regarding this matter, please contact my office at X 2935. THANKS, DEBBIE FOUNTAIN Attachment c I' HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT REDEVELOPMENT OFFICE 2965 Roosevelt Street Suite B Carlsbad, CA 92008 (619) 434-2811 (EitQ 0f (ttarlBbaii FEBRUARY 21, 1992 TOM COX JEFF STOUTENBOROUGH MUSSER & COX ARCHITECTS 3184-B AIRWAY AVENUE COSTA MESA, CA. 92626 RE: ARMY NAVY ACADEMY MASTER SITE PLAN DISCUSSIONS Dear Tom & Jeff: Per our conversation on Thursday, February 13, 1992, the following provides a summary of the issues which have been discussed between the Carlsbad Housing and Redevelopment Department and your office on the Master Site Plan for the Army Navy Academy: 1. PEDESTRIANIZATION OF CYPRESS STREET - We understand that the partial pedestrianization of Cypress Street is desirable for student safety and traffic circulation reasons. 2. JOINT USE OF GYMNASIUM AS FUTURE THEATER - Redevelopment staff advised Army Navy Academy that the City has been looking for a site for a performing arts theater. The Army Navy Academy agreed to discuss and show the proposed renovation of the existing gymnasium into a joint use theater on their plans if the City will consider using Redevelopment•s ability to facilitate obtainment of the "State Parcel" for a site to build a replacement gym with the possibility of Redevelopment funding to become available for renovating the theater. We agreed that a decorative walkway connecting the proposed parking structure with the theater is also desirable. 3. APPLE INN - We agreed that the Army Navy Academy should retain use of the historic Red Apple Inn building. We agreed that preservation of the building is critical. To reduce the "wear and tear" on the building, Army Navy Academy has proposed to change the use of the Red Apple Inn from the dining commons to administrative offices. The dining commons will be moved to the west side of the property. 4. RECREATION BUILDING ON OCEl^ STREET - To preserve views of the ocean, Army Navy Academy has proposed to depress the recreation hall building. The roofiine will be 4 feet above r street level. This will enhance and preserve the view corridor. Housing and Redevelopment is supportive of this proposed action. 5. VIEW CORRIDOR - The Housing and Redevelopment Department is supportive of actions by the Army Navy Academy to "open up" more view corridors to the ocean. We believe this will gain favor with the Coastal Commission. 6. VEHICLE ACCESS FROM CARLSBAD BOULEVARD TO ACADEMY - Upon direction of the City Traffic Engineer, no vehicle access will be provided from Academy (out of parking lot) to Carlsbad Boulevard. Access to Academy would be provided off of existing streets (Mountain View Drive, Pacific Avenue, and Cypress Avenue). 7. STATE-OWNED PROPERTY (BEECH AND CARLSBAD BLVD.) - We agreed to discuss the City/Agency's assistance in acquisition of State-owned property on corner of Beech and Carlsbad Boulevard in exchange for joint use of a proposed new theater and parking structure which will provide Lagoon ingress/egress. The Army and Navy Academy has proposed to consolidate all physical education activities on it's property adjacent to the State's property. New parking spaces would be provided off of Beech if this property is acquired. 8. NEW PARKING AREA/STRUCTURE - We agreed that the idea of a proposed new parking area to provide overflow parking for the Academy, the athletic fields, lagoon and proposed new theater is a good idea. The Redevelopment Agency may also want to participate in building a parking structure to accommodate joint use of the theater by the City and Army and Navy Academy. Housing and Redevelopment Department is also supportive of the new parking area/structure because it may provide the City with open access to Buena Vista Lagoon (gateway entry). 9. LINEAR PARK ALONG RAILROAD FROM BEECH TO BUENA VISTA LAGOON - Housing and Redevelopment Staff advised that a linear park inside the railroad right-of-way is being planned. Musser & Cox: Architects agreed to show some suggestions for how the linear park might be developed and agreed to tie the linear park to existing public right-of- way and the potential joint use parking structure. Army and Navy Academy agreed to tie the linear park nodes into the scheme for their master site plan as a "good neighbor" gesture to the City of Carlsbad. 10. UNDERGROUNDING OF UTILITIES - The Housing and Redevelopment Department offered to cooperate with the school and explore any funding sources for the undergrounding of major utilities on the Army Navy Academy property and adjacent property. 9 11. CYPRESS & DEL MAR RIGHT-OF-WAY PROBLEMS - We discussed the problems with "right-of-way" on Cypress and Del Mar. Army Navy Academy agreed to resolve these issues within the proposed Master Site Plan. 12. PROJECT PROCESSING - Housing and Redevelopment Staff agreed to "chaperon" project through processing system. We agreed that this would be a tremendous asset to the project. 13. DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - A Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) is the next step to outline the expectations and benefits to both the City and the Academy of various proposed facilities on the Army Navy Academy property (i.e., parking facility, theater, etc.) and any assistance to be provided on behalf of the City/Agency for the project. A DDA is typically prepared through negotiations between the Carlsbad Redevelopment Agency and Army Navy Academy (Jim Dorman, Attorney) upon direction by the Housing and Redevelopment Commission/City Council. The Master Site Plan will be taken forward to the Housing and Redevelopment Commission/City Council in its "conceptual stage" as an exhibit for the purpose of discussing the City/Agency's desire to enter into exclusive negotiations for this project. If the Housing and Redevelopment Commission/City Council wants to pursue negotiations with the Army Navy Academy, staff will proceed as instructed and prepare the appropriate documents. All of the above issues have been discussed during several preliminary meetings held between your office, as representative of the Army Navy Academy, and City staff. If you believe there are additional issues which were not addressed above or corrections to the listed issues, please contact Debbie Fountain or myself at (619) 434-2811. The Carlsbad Redevelopment Agency is supportive of the Master Site Plan for the Army Navy Academy. We believe all efforts to upgrade existing buildings located on the Army Navy Academy property will be beneficial to the Village Redevelopment Project Area. Good^Luck with the project!1 REDEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DEBBIE FOUNTAIN, PROJECT MANAGER DON NEU, PROJECT PLANNER JIM DAVIS, PROJECT ENGINEER MARTY ORENYAK, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR FEBRUARY 20, 1992 TO: DON NEU, SENIOR PLANNER FROM: DEBBIE FOUNTAIN, SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST ARMY NAVY ACADEMY APPLICATION FOR DORMITORY BUILDING As we discussed on February 11, 1992, the issue of processing the dormitory building application for the Army Navy Academy prior to approval of the Master Site Plan was discussed with the applicant on February 13, 1992. The applicant was opposed to holding the dormitory application until the Master Site Plan is approved. So, I discussed this matter with Kathy Graham to attempt to figure out what to do! Kathy, in turn, discussed the matter with Gary Wayne and Marty Orenyak on February 13, 1992 at their 2:00pm Community Development Meeting. The decision at the noted meeting was to allow Army Navy Academy to submit their dormitory application and process it concurrently with the Master Site Plan application. However, the Army Navy Academy is required to submit a letter stating that they understand that processing on the Master Site Plan application may be delayed as a result of this change in events. The letter is currently being prepared by the applicant representative, Musser and Cox Architects. Since I did not want the applicant to submit their application without appropriate explanations, I agreed to submit it for them. So, enclosed with this memo is the Army Navy Academy application, site plans and check in the amount of $1670 for applicable fees. Your assistance in processing this application according to applicable procedures will be greatly appreciated!! If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact my office at extension 2935. THANKS! DEBBIE FOUNTAIN to ^ ''o-J-i_-o L^jj^-^ jxc-xii^l " MUSSER&COX. ARC HITECT February 19, 1992 Mr. Marty Orynak Director City of Carlsbad Community Development 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859 re: Army and Navy Academy - Atkinson/Crean Dormitory MCA job number; JOB # 91015.50 Dear Marty: This letter is submitted to you at your request to outline our understanding of submittal particulars for the two Army and Navy Academy projects submitted to Planning for Redevelopment Permit review. In conversations with Debbie Fountain at the City of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department, we have learned that the submittal of the Atkinson/Crean dormitory for Redevelopment Permit may affect the processing for the already submitted Master Site Plan for the campus. We understand that it is your position that the processing of the Master Site Plan for the campus may be delayed and that the processing of the dorm building may affect some or all of the master site plan exhibits already submitted for Major Redevelopment Permit. Our understanding prior to submittal of these projects was that they could be reviewed simultaneously, and due to the circumstance that a potential donor has stepped up to provide funding for phase 1 of the Master Site Plan development (the dormitory building) we have submitted the two projects one after the other, causing the processing of the two to overlap. The application for the Army and Navy Academy Master Site Plan was submitted to the City Planning Department on November 21, 1991 and we received notice on December 19, 1991 that the application was "incomplete". We understand that we have six (6) months from the date of application, or until April 21, 1992, to either re-submit the application or submit the required additional inforraation before the application is deemed "withdrawn" by the City. We do not wish to withdraw or have the Master Site Plan application be deemed withdrawn by the City due to expiration of the six (6) month period. Therefore, if 3184-B Airway Avenue/Costa Mesa, CA 92626/(714) 545-8547 processing of the Master Site Plan must be placed on hold while processing of the dormitory application proceeds, we request that an extension to the 6 month time period for the Master Site Plan application be granted by the Planning Department. We request an extension equal to the amount of time it takes to approve the dormitory application and/or remove the temporary "hold status" on the Master Site Plan application. It is our hope that the Master Site Plan processing continue with no delay due to the dormitory submittal. However, if it is necessary to process the items one at a time, the dormitory submittal will take priority due to the limited window of availability of funds being offered by the dorm's sponsor/donor. Sincerely, MUSSER & COX: ARCHITECTS Jeffrey A. Stoutenborough, Architect Project Manager cc Debbie Fountain, Michael Holzmiller, Alan O'Kain a:\lt021992.doc Citv of Carlsbad Planning Department December 19, 1991 Jeffrey A. Stoutenborough Musser & Cox Architects 3184-B Airway Avenue Costa Mesa, CA 92626 SUBJECT: RP91-9/CDP 91-4-ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY MASTER PLAN Thank you for applying for Land Use Pennits in the City of Carlsbad. The Planning Department has reviewed your Redevelopment Pennit and Coastal Development Permit, appUcation no. RP 91-9 and CDP 91-4, 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. All list iteins must be submitted simultaneously at the (Communitv Development Building counter and a copv of this list must be included with vour submittals. No processing of your application can occur until the application is detennined to be complete. The second list is issues of concem to staff. When all required materials are submitted the City has 30 days to make a detennination 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 appUcation was initially filed, November 21, 1991, to either re-submit the application or submit the required information. Failure to resubmit the application or to submit the materials necessary to detennine your appUcation complete shall be deemed to constitute withdrawal of the appUcation. If an application is withdrawn or deemed v^thdrawn, a new appUcation must be submitted. Please contact your staff planner, Don Neu, at (619) 438-1161 extension 4446, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the appUcation. Sincerely, MICH/LEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director MJH:DN:vd cc: Gary Wayne Kathy Graham Robert Green Debbie Foimtain Erin Letsch File Copy Bob Wojcik Data Entry Jim Davis Marjorie/Steve 2075 Las Palmas Drive • Carlsbad, California 92009-4859 • (619) 438-1161 RP 91-9/CDP 91-4 - ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY MASTER PIAN DECEMBER 19, 1991 PAGE 2 UST OF ITEMS NEEDED A TO COMPLETE APPUCATION: PLANNING: 1. A Conditional Use Pennit AppUcation is required to be filed for areas of the project site which are located outside of the redevelopment area (Zoning Ordinance Section 21.42.010(2)(c). An application fee is required for this permit. 2. The grading information required by item number 4 of the Coastal Development Permit Supplemental AppUcation shaU be provided. The project plans show proposed grading. 3. Revise the project exhibits to also include a conditional use permit as one of the application types submitted. The proposed master plan does not meet the City's requirements for this type of pennit. It appears to actually be more of a master site development plan. The title block on the project plans should be revised to reflect this unless the appUcant is wilUng to create a master plan text including all necessary elements such as design standards. 4. The exhibits should be revised to Ust the City of Carlsbad as the sewering agency not the Carlsbad Municipal Water District. 5. The zoning exhibit submitted must be revised to include the zone for each parcel plotted on the individual parcels. 6. The exhibits should contain the total number of parking spaces required. The required parking has been detennined to be 135 spaces based on a maximimi student occupancy of 272 requiring one space per 10 students and one space per employee based on a provided number of 107 employees. The total niunber of spaces in each individual parking area should be noted on each parking area on the exhibit. 7. The Average Daily Traffic generated by the project based on SANDAG Generation Rates is required to be included on the project exhibits. 8. The approximate location of existing buildings and permanent stmctures located within 100 to the north of the site must be provided. 9. There are several discrepancies in the exhibits showing the existing property lines. An example is the State of Califomia owned property which does not have parcel lines plotted for it on the exhibits. The actual boundaries of the proposed project need clarification. RP 91-9/CDP 91-4 - ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY MASTER PLAN DECEMBER 19, 1991 A PAGE 3 A City Disclosure Statement signed by the record owner of each parcel proposed for inclusion in the appUcation but which is not owned by the Army 8c Navy Academy is required prior to the applications being deemed complete. 10. The distance between buildings and/or stmctures must be dimensioned on the exhibits. The minimum distance aUowed by the Zoning Ordinance is 10 feet. 11. Setback dimensions are required for all stmctures. The foUowing minimum setbacks should be maintained for aU new stmctures (including fences and waUs over 42 inches in height) from property lines: a) 20 feet from Carlsbad Boulevard b) 15 feet from all other streets c) 10 feet from interior property lines. 12. The plans need to include information on the height and materials of aU waUs and fences. 13. Label the monument sign on the plans and indicate the height and area. It is presently shown on the project plans in the street right-of-way. 14. The width of all streets adjacent to the project site are required to be dimensioned on the exhibits. 15. Typical street cross sections are required to be provided for Ocean Street, Pacific Avenue, Cypress Avenue, Del Mar Avenue, Garfield Street, and Mountain View Avenue. 16. Clearly show parking staU and isle dimensions and tmck tuming radu for all parking areas. 17. Show the location of all fire hydrants within 300 feet of the site. 18. Indicate on the project exhibits those existing onsite trees proposed to be removed and those to be saved. 19. Provide earthwork volumes for the proposed site grading. Cut, fiU, import and export quantities are required. 20. Spot elevations are needed for the comers of the building pad for buildings 36, 45, 49 as weU as the tennis courts and pool area. 21. BuUding elevations are required. In Ueu of bmlding elevations design guidelines and massing studies (cross sections) could be provided for inclusion as part of a text to accompany the exhibits. Maximum building heights and number of stories must be provided. Refer to the Zoning Ordinance regarding height and story maximums. RP 91-9/CDP 91-4 - ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY MASTER PLAN DECEMBER 19, 1991 ^ ^ PAGE 4 5l ^ 22. A pubUc Facilities Fee Agreement is not required for the constmction of any building by a non-profit corporation estabUshed exclusively for educational purposes. Please submit a letter requesting that the $40.00 fee be refunded to you. 23. The Preliminary Title Report submitted with the appUcation is more than 6 months old (dated May 4, 1989). Please provide a Preliminary Title Report that is cunent within the last six months. 24. Include on the Constraints Map the boimdaries of the Beach Area Overlay Zone which covers areas shown on the exhibit. 25. On the Conceptual Landscape Plan the quantity and size of each proposed plant or tree species must be provided. 26. If this is to be a Master Plan then a text is required which must include the information Usted under item number 18 of the application checkUst prior to the application being deemed complete. 27. A constmction materials board and color samples in addition to roof plans showing the location of roof appurtenances and mechanical equipment are required. These items could also be included in design guidelines/master plan text in lieu of being provided at this time. 28. The project site contains stmctures identified on the City's Historic Inventory Ust as being grade 3. These are stmctures which are detennined to have local Carlsbad significance. A complete survey and records search is required to be prepared pursuant to the "City of Carlsbad Cultural Resource GuideUnes", dated December 1990. The guidelines also specify the minimtmi qualifications for cultural resource professionals which must be followed as well as survev methodology, evaluation (testing) of resources, and report format. The report must be approved by City Staff and the Historic Preservation Commission. ENGINEERING: 1. Tide report is too old. Should be dated in last 6 months. 2. Project boundaries are technicaUy inconect. This is further explained in the issues below. No. 2. 3. Easements are not plotted on the site plan. Some are shown on the opportunities and constraints exhibit but not aU. None are plotted with dimensions. 4. Part of the project will be in the high tide zone. This requires a Special Use Permit application. RP 91-9/CDP 91-4 - ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY MASTER PLAN DECEMBER 19, 1991 ^ PAGE 5 5. No grading quantities are given. The work on the coastal bluffs and parking stmcture wiU require some grading and perhaps retaining walls and shore-sea-waU protection. 6. Parking lots, parking stmcture and access aisles to these are not dimensioned. 7. Plotting of pubUc right-of-way in vicinity of Cypress Avenue and Garfield Avenue is missing. 8. No street cross-sections of Pacific Avenue, Cypress Avenue, Garfield Avenue and Ocean Street are shown. 9. No traffic average daUy tips are given or shown on the plans. 10. AP Nos. are missing. These APN are 203-141-2 and 3; and 203-142-6. 11. No layout of the parking stmcture lower level is shown. 12. Not ALL faciUties are labeUed as "Existing" or "Proposed". Please do so. This includes sewer, water, drainage, streets, street Ughts, fire hydrants. 13. A traffic report is required to address the site specifics and any impacted road segments or intersections. ISSUES OF CONCERN PLANNING: 1. A text is required as part of a master plan submittal as stated under the items needed to complete the appUcation. The text should also indicate the goal of the plan, proposed phasing, and development standards. Individual components or projects identified in the master plan wiU be required to receive approval of a minor or major redevelopment permit pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Sections 21.35.070 and 21.35.080 as weU as a Coastal Development Permit. Areas outside of redevelopment wiU be required to receive approval of a Site Development Plan pursuant to the Beach Area Overlay Zone in addition to a Coastal Permit approved by the Califomia Coastal Commission. This procedure should be specified in the master plan text. As an altemative you may want to consider providing aU information required of a Redevelopment Permit for each proposed bmlding or improvement (ie., building elevations, floor plans, etc.). This would aUow the City to approve detailed plans for each component of the Campus Plan so that future Redevelopment Permits, Coastal Permits, and Site Development Plans would not be needed. This would however liinit you to submitting future building plans which conform to the approved plans. RP 91-9/CDP 91-4 - ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY MASTER PLAN DECEMBER 19, 1991 PAGE 6 2. The height and mass for proposed buildings is an issue in regard to compatibiUty with adjacent uses and the impact of stmctures on the coastal bluff. 3. Trash enclosures are required which meet the specifications of Coast Waste Management as weU as the City of Carlsbad. The location of proposed enclosures wiU result in 6 foot high waUs being located in street setbacks. In addition trash tmcks would be required to block the pubUc street to provide service. New locations should be proposed for trash enclosures. 4. Additional information is needed in regard to the proposed grading. It is difficult to detennine the extent of landform alteration proposed by the plan given the very Umited grading information provided. The areas of greatest concem are along the coastal bluff and adjacent to the open space area south of the Buena Vista Lagoon. 5. The Scenic Corridor Guidelines, dated July 1, 1988, indicate on page 24 the landscape theme for the corridor. The species identified in the Guidelines must be incorporated into the Conceptual Landscape Plan. In addition the City of Carlsbad Landscape Manual dated, November 13,1990, identifies additional theme plantings on pages C.1-2 and C.1-3 that must be incorporated. 6. The City's Landscape Architect has reviewed the Conceptual Landscape Plan. His coinments are contained on a copy of the plan. Please incorporate these revisions into the plan and submit the redlined print with the modified exhibit. 7. Trails shown on property not owned by the Army 8c Navy Academy should be shown as not a part of this project. A note on the areas of the plan where the traUs are shown wiU suffice. 8. A lot line adjustment appUcation is needed to consoUdate parcels which show as separate Assessor Parcels as weU as to remove property Unes proposed to be covered by stmctures. It also appears that stmctures have been built in the right-of-way for Del Mar Avenue. The Engineering Department wiU address this issue further. 9. Based on the maximum enrollment and number of employees provided the academy requires 135 off street parking spaces. The required number of parking spaces must be provided and shaU be related to the phased improvements so that at no time does the academy not satisfy the City's parking standard. 10. Revise the plans as necessary to meet the Zoning Ordinance parking requirement of 170 square feet per space with a minimum width of 8'-6". 11. Handicap parking is required based on the total number of parking spaces for the academy. Four (4) spaces are required which should be located in the surface parking lot in the central area of the campus. 12. A ininimum throat distance of 20 feet is required for aU parking areas. RP 91-9/CDP 91-4 - ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY MASTER PLAN DECEMBER 19, 1991 ^ PAGE 7 13. Bliilding elevations or detaUed design criteria and bmlding sections (massing study) are needed for the proposed parking stmcture to evaluate its potential impacts. Plans showing the second level of parking and indicating whether it is a second story above ground stmcture or surface parking with one underground level are required. 14. A view conidor has been created across the site from Carlsbad Boulevard on the east which is blocked by the proposed placement of the new building 46 (Recreational/Dining HaU). Bmlding 46 should be adjusted so that this view corridor can be extended to the coastline pursuant to the requirements of the Coastal Plan and the North Beach Design Guidelines which require that a minimum of 10 percent of the lot width be preserved as a view corridor. 15. Design guidelines created for the project should include appUcable recommendations of the North Beach Planning/Traffic Study dated April 1987. 16. Parking must be screened to the greatest extent feasible from outside the property line by the use of a 36 inch berm or decorative waU along street front property lines. This impacts the surface parking lot in the area nearest to Carlsbad Boulevard as weU as the proposed parking stmcture. Screening of parking areas along side and rear lot lines must also be provided. 17. The application needs to address how the noise impacts of the proposed firing range wUl be mitigated. 18. Is housing which qualifies as affordable housing under City Standards proposed as part of the plan? 19. The Conceptual Landscape Plan shows boUards on Cypress Avenue. Does the plan propose closing this street to pubUc vehicular access? Please clarify the intent regarding potential closing of Cypress Street on aU the project exhibits. This issue needs to be considered by Engineering, Planning and Redevelopment as to the issues such as a proposal raises. 20. Enclosed is a redlined set of project exhibits (date stamped November 21,1991) for your review and use. Please address all items identified on each sheet and submit these redlined exhibits with your revised plans to assist the project planner in the continued review of your project. ENGINEERING: 1. Entrance to parking stmcture lower level should be straight in at approximately 90° to the street/or radial. RP 91-9/CDP 91-4 - ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY MASTER PLAN DECEMBER 19, 1991 PAGE 8 2. Project boundaries are shown with bearings and distances that we can not verify. These bearings or distances do not appear in the title report, nor on any tract map, nor on the assessors plats nor on any City plans, some are inconect, such as the N. Line of Cypress, N-83°-28'-49"-E, 148.99. This Une is not a property line we know anything about. The assessor's plat shows a "Del Mar Avenue" here with an entirely different line. The line shown as the easterly line of Mountain is inconect near Pacific Avenue. 3. The Exhibits should not show development on others property, that is the traUs shown on the ATficSF RaUway right-of-way. This is a sensitive issue with the raUway Company. You may show a "possible" or "proposed connection to proposed City traU system" but stop at the property line. 4. The tunnel crossing is discouraged. The bridge wiU be supported by engineering. The Police Department should also be consulted. 5. On the opportunities and constraints exhibit the word "Vacate" is used. If this means vacation of a pubUc access (street, walk or aUey) then street vacation procedures wiU need to be foUowed, by State Law. The "Vacate" shown for Beech Avenue near the railroad right-of-way is an issue as this route is proposed to be used by the North County Transit District. 6. The title report mentions a Certificate of CompUance (Article 39). We need a City C.C. number or a copy of the recorded instmment in order to review the document. 7. What type of vehicles (or their tuming radius) wiU access the maintenance facility. 8. The Master Plan Text mentions that "assistance" wiU be needed for sidewalks. Unless an agreement is reached with the City this project wiU be required to install all public improvements at it's cost. 9. The parking stmcture is mentioned as a "shared" stmcture and mention is made of City participation. A capital improvement project would be needed for either this or item 8 above if the City is to participate. 10. We wiU require a dedication of additional right-of-way for Cypress Avenue, near Garfield Street and along the easterly line of Mountain View Drive. 11. Undergrounding of power transmission lines through the project will require coordination with S.D.G.ScE. 12. Coordination by the appUcant with the Coastal Commission is suggested for the issues of pubUc access to the beach and pubUc parking requirements. RP 91-9/CDP 91-4 - ARMY S^NAVY ACADEMY MASTER PLAN DECEMBER 19, 1991 PAGE 9 REDEVELOPMENT: 1. The Redevelopment Agency is very supportive of the Army Navy Academy's short and long term efforts to revitalize/renovate the various educational and boarding facUities located on the identified property. The proposed projects included as part of the Master Plan wiU be very beneficial to the ViUage area. The Academy is located on ideal property which has high visibiUty to tourists and local residents/business operators. Therefore, we believe it is important for the Academy to take these actions to renovate and adapt to a changing environment in order to properly serve the students, faculty, administration and the community as a whole. 2. Redevelopment staff has discussed the issue of joint (pubUc/private) use of the proposed new parking faciUty with the Army Navy Academy and we would like to continue this discussion prior to taking this item forward to the Design Review Board and/or Housing and Redevelopment Commission. If possible, it is the Redevelopment Agency's intent to develop an agreement which would aUow joint use of the parking stmcture as previously indicated. 3. Redevelopment Staff has also discussed the issue of joint use (pubUc/private) of the theater and playing fields on the Academy property with the appUcant. We would like to continue this discussion as weU prior to taking this item forward to the Design Review Board and/or Housing and Redevelopment Commission. 4. Issues regarding any financial assistance form the Redevelopment Agency for improvement to, or for, the Army Navy Academy must be discussed in further detail with the Housing and Redevelopment Director prior to the Design Review Board and/or Housing and Redevelopment Commission taking action on the proposed Master Plan. 5. In order to determine whether or not the Academy provides any housing for persons within very low, low and/or moderate income categories, it is requested that the appUcant provide a summary of the characteristics of the persons housed at the Academy. For example, please provide a summary of the number of teachers, administrators, counselors, etc. who reside on the Academy cemipus and a breakdown of their gross income levels. This wiU help us to determine whether or not the proposed project(s) wiU assist the City in meeting its goals to provide affordable housing in Carlsbad. December 19, 1991 TO: DON NEU, PLANNING FROM: DEBBIE FOUNTAIN, REDEVELOPMENT ARMY NAVY ACADEMY MASTER PLAN APPLICATION Please add the following Redevelopment comments (section) to the "application review" letter being sent to Jeff Stoutenborough, Musser & Cox Architects, regarding the Army Navy Academy's application for a redevelopment permit (91-9)/Coastal Development Permit (91-4) for their Master Plan: REDEVELOPMENT COMMENTS 1. The Redevelopment Agency is very supportive of the Army Navy Academy's short and long term efforts to revitalize/renovate the various educational and boarding facilities located on the identified property. The proposed projects included as part of the Master Plan will be very beneficial to the Village area. The Academy is located on ideal property which has high visibility to tourists and local residents/business operators. Therefore, we believe it is important for the Academy to take these actions to renovate and adapt to a changing environment in order to properly serve the students, faculty, administration and the community as a whole. 2. Redevelopment Staff has discussed the issue of joint (public/private) use of the proposed new parking facility with the Army Navy Academy and we would like to continue this discussion prior to taking this item forward to the Design Review Board and/or Housing and Redevelopment Commission. If possible, it is the Redevelopment Agency's intent to develop an agreement which would allow joint use of the parking structure as previously indicated. 3. Redevelopment Staff has also discussed the issue of joint use (public/private) of the theater and playing fields on the Academy property with the applicant. We would like to continue this discussion as well prior to taking this item forward to the Design Review Board and/or Housing and Redevelopment Commission. 4. Issues regarding any financial assistance from the Redevelopment Agency for improvements to, or for, the Army Navy Academy must be discussed in further detail with the Housing and Redevelopment Director prior to the Design Review Board and/or Housing and Redevelopment Commission taking action on the proposed Master Plan. In order to determine whether or not the Academy provides any housing for persons within very low, low and/or moderate income categories, it is requested that the applicant provide a summary of the characteristics of the persons housed at the Academy. For example, please provide a summary of the number of teachers, administrators, counselors, etc. who reside on the Academy campus and a breakdown of their gross income levels. This will help us to determine whether or not the proposed project(s) will assist the City in meeting its goals to provide affordable housing in Carlsbad. Citv of Carlsbad Planning Department December 18, 1991 Jeffrey A. Stoutenborough Musser & Cox Architects 3184-B Airway Avenue Costa Mesa, CA 92626 DRAFT SUBJECT: RP 91-9/CDP 91^ - ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY MASTER PLAN Thank you for applying for Land Use Permits in t\ie City of Cadsbad. t^ve ?\atvmtv^ Department has reviewed your Redevelopment Pennit and Coastal Development Permit, appUcation no. RP 91-9 and CDP 91-4, as to its completeness for processmg. The application is incomplete, as submitted. Attached are two Usts. The first Ust is information which must be submitted to complete your appUcation. All list items must be submitted simultaneously at the Commimity Development Building coimter and a copy of this list must be included with your submittals. No processing of your application can occur until the appUcation is detennined to be complete. The second Ust is issues of concem to staff. When all required materials are submitted the City has 30 days to make a detennination of completeness. If the appUcation is detennined to be complete, processing for a decision on the appUcation wiU be initiated. In addition, please note that you have six months from the date the appUcation was initially filed, November 21, 1991, to either re-submit the appUcation or submit the required information. FaUure to resubmit the appUcation or to submit the materials necessary to determine your appUcation complete shaU be deemed to constitute withdrawal of the appUcation. If an appUcation is withdrawn or deemed withdrawn, a new appUcation must be submitted. Please contact your staff planner, Don Neu, at (619) 438-1161 extension 4446, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the appUcation. Sincerely, MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director MJH:DN:vd cc: Gary Wayne Robert Green Erin Letsch Bob Wojcik Jim Davis Kathy Graham Debbie Fountain FUe Copy Data Entry Marjorie/Steve 2075 Las Palmas Drive • Carlsbad, California 92009-4859 • (619) 438-1161 (9 RP 91-9/CDP 91-4 - ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY MASTER PLAN DECEMBER 18, 1991 ^ ^ PAGE 2 B W UST OF ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE APPUCATION: PLANNING: 1. A Conditional Use Permit AppUcation is required to be fUed for areas of the project site which are located outside of the redevelopment area (Zoning Ordinance Section 21.42.010(2) (c). An appUcation fee is required for this pennit. 2. The grading information required by item number 4 of the Coastal Development Permit Supplemental AppUcation shaU be provided. The project plans show proposed grading. 3. Revise the project exhibits to also include a conditional use pennit as one of the appUcation types submitted. The proposed master plan does not meet the City's requirements for this type of pennit. It appears to actuaUy be more of a master site development plan. The title block on the project plans should be revised to reflect this unless the appUcant is wUling to create a master plan text including aU necessary elements such as design standards. 4. The exhibits should be revised to Ust the City of Carlsbad as the sewering agency not the Carlsbad Municipal Water District. 5. The zoning exhibit submitted must be revised to include the zone for each parcel plotted on the individual parcels. 6. The exhibits should contain the total number of parking spaces required. The required parking has been determined to be 135 spaces based on a maximum student occupancy of 272 requiring one space per 10 students and one space per employee based on a provided number of 107 employees. The total number of spaces in each individual parking area should be noted on each parking area on the exhibit. 7. The Average DaUy Traffic generated by the project based on SANDAG Generation Rates is required to be included on the project exhibits. 8. The approximate location of existing buUdings and permanent stmctures located within 100 to the north of the site must be provided. 9. There are several discrepancies in the exhibits showing the existing property lines. An example is the State of Califomia owned property which does not have parcel Unes plotted for it on the exhibits. The actual boimdaries of the proposed project need clarification. RP 91-9/CDP 91-4 - ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY MASTER PLAN DECEMBER 18, 1991 PAGE 3 W A City Disclosure Statement signed by the record owner of each parcel proposed for inclusion in the appUcation but which is not ovmed by the Army 8c Navy Academy is required prior to the appUcations being deemed complete. 10. The distance between buUdings and/or stmctures must be dimensioned on the exhibits. The ininimum distance aUowed by the Zoning Ordinance is 10 feet. 11. Setback dimensions are required for aU stmctures. The foUowing minimum setbacks should be maintained for aU new stmctures (including fences and waUs over 42 inches in height) from property lines: a) 20 feet from Carlsbad Boulevard b) 15 feet from aU other streets c) 10 feet from interior property Unes. 12. The plans need to include information on the height and materials of aU walls and fences. 13. Label the monument sign on the plans and indicate the height and area. It is presently shown on the project plans in the street right-of-way. 14. The width of all streets adjacent to the project site are required to be dimensioned on the exhibits. 15. Typical street cross sections are required to be provided for Ocean Street, Pacific Avenue, Cypress Avenue, Del Mar Avenue, Garfield Street, and Mountain View Avenue. 16. Clearly show parking stall and isle dimensions and tmck tuming radU for all parking areas. 17. Show the location of aU fire hydrants within 300 feet of the site. 18. Indicate on the project exhibits those existing onsite trees proposed to be removed and those to be saved. 19. Provide earthwork volumes for the proposed site grading. Cut, fiU, import and export quantities are required. 20. Spot elevations are needed for the comers of the buUding pad for buUdings 36, 45, 49 as weU as the tennis courts and pool area. 21. BuUding elevations are required. In Ueu of buUding elevations design guidelines and massing studies (cross sections) could be provided for inclusion as part of a text to accompany the exhibits. Maximum buUding heights and number of stories must be provided. Refer to the Zoning Ordinance regarding height and story maximums. RP 91-9/CDP 91-4 - ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY MASTER PLAN DECEMBER 18, 1991 ^ PAGE 4 " 22. A pubUc FaciUties Fee Agreement is not required for the constmction of any buUding by a non-profit corporation estabUshed exclusively for educational purposes. Please submit a letter requesting that the $40.00 fee be refunded to you. 23. The Preliminary Titie Report submitted with the application is more than 6 months old (dated May 4, 1989). Please provide a Preliminary Title Report that is cunent within the last six months. 24. Include on the Constraints Map the boimdaries of the Beach Area Overlay Zone which covers areas shown on the exhibit. 25. On the Conceptual Landscape Plan the quantity and size of each proposed plant or tree species must be provided. 26. If this is to be a Master Plan then a text is required which must include the information listed under item number 18 of the appUcation checklist prior to the appUcation being deemed complete. 27. A constmction materials board and color samples in addition to roof plans showing the location of roof appurtenances and mechanical equipment are required. These iteins could also be included in design guidelines/master plan text in lieu of being provided at this time. 28. The project site contains stmctures identified on the City's Historic Inventory Ust as being grade 3. These are stmctures which are detennined to have local Carlsbad significance. A complete survey and records search is required to be prepared pursuant to the "City of Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines", dated December 1990. The guidelines also specify the minimum qualifications for cultural resource professionals which must be foUowed as well as survev methodology, evaluation (testing) of resources, and report format. The report must be approved by City Staff and the Historic Preservation Commission. ENGINEERING: 1. Titie report is too old. Should be dated in last 6 months. 2. Project boundaries are technicaUy inconect. This is further explained in the issues below. No. 2. 3. Easements are not plotted on the site plan. Some are shown on the opportimities and constraints exhibit but not aU. None are plotted with dimensions. 4. Part of the project wiU be in the high tide zone. This requires a Special Use Permit appUcation. RP 91-9/CDP 91-4 - ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY MASTER PLAN DECEMBER 18, 1991 ^ PAGE 5 " 5. No grading quantities are given. The work on the coastal bluffs and parking 4 stmcture wiU require some grading and perhaps retaining walls and shore-sea-waU protection. 6. Parking lots, parking stmcture and access aisles to these are not dimensioned. 7. Plotting of pubUc right-of-way in vicinity of Cypress Avenue and Garfield Avenue is missing.' 8. No street cross-sections of Pacific Avenue, Cypress Avenue, Garfield Avenue and Ocean Street are shown. 9. No traffic average daUy tips are given or shown on the plans. 10. AP Nos. are missing. These APN are 203-141-2 and 3; and 203-142-6. 11. No layout of the parking stmcture lower level is shown. 12. Not ALL facilities are labeUed as "Existing" or "Proposed". Please do so. This includes sewer, water, drainage, streets, street lights, fire hydrants. 13. A traffic report is required to address the site specifics and any impacted road segments or intersections. ISSUES OF CONCERN PLANNING: 1. A text is required as part of a master plan submittal as stated under the iteins needed to complete the appUcation. The text should also indicate the goal of the plan, proposed phasing, and development standards. Individual components or projects identified in the master plan wiU be required to receive approval of a minor or major redevelopment pennit pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Sections 21.35.070 and 21.35.080 as well as a Coastal Development Permit. Areas outside of redevelopment wiU be required to receive approval of a Site Development Plan pursuant to the Beach Area Overlay Zone in addition to a Coastal Permit approved by the Califomia Coastal Commission. This procedure should be specified in the master plan text. 2. The height and mass for proposed buUdings is an issue in regard to compatibiUty with adjacent uses and the impact of stmctures on the coastal bluff. 3. Trash enclosures are required which meet the specifications of Coast Waste Management as weU as the City of Carlsbad. The location of proposed enclosures wiU result in 6 foot high waUs being located in street setbacks. In addition trash tmcks would be required to block the pubUc street to provide service. New locations should be proposed for trash enclosures. RP 91-9/CDP 91-4 - ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY MASTER PLAN DECEMBER 18, 1991 PAGE 6 4. Additional information is needed in regard to the proposed grading. It is difficult to detennine the extent of landform alteration proposed by the plan given the very limited grading information provided. The areas of greatest concem are along the coastal bluff and adjacent to the open space area south of the Buena Vista Lagoon. 5. The Scenic Corridor Guidelines, dated July 1, 1988, indicate on page 24 the landscape theme for the corridor. The species identified in the Guidelines must be incorporated into the Conceptual Landscape Plan. In addition the City of Carlsbad Landscape Manual dated, November 13,1990, identifies additional theme plantings on pages C.1-2 and C.1-3 that must be incorporated. 6. The City's Landscape Architect has reviewed the Conceptual Landscape Plan. His coinments are contained on a copy of the plan. Please incorporate these revisions into the plan and submit the redlined print with the modified exhibit. 7. TraUs shown on property not owned by the Army 8c Navy Academy should be shown as not a part of this project. A note on the areas of the plan where the traUs are shown wiU suffice. 8. A lot line adjustment application is needed to consoUdate parcels which show as separate Assessor Parcels as weU as to remove property lines proposed to be covered by stmctures. It also appears that stmctures have been buUt in the right-of-way for Del Mar Avenue. The Engineering Department wiU address this issue further. 9. Based on the maximum enrollment and number of employees provided the academy requires 135 off street parking spaces. The required number of parking spaces must be provided and shaU be related to the phased improvements so that at no time does the academy not satisfy the City's parking standard. 10. Revise the plans as necessary to meet the Zoning Ordinance parking requirement of 170 square feet per space with a ininimum width of 8'-6". 11. Handicap parking is required based on the total number of parking spaces for the academy. Four (4) spaces are required which should be located in the surface parking lot in the central area of the campus. 12. A minimum throat distance of 20 feet is required for aU parking areas. 13. BuUding elevations or detailed design criteria and buUding sections (massing study) are needed for the proposed parking stmcture to evaluate its potential impacts. Plans showing the second level of parking and indicating whether it is a second story above ground stmcture or surface parking with one underground level are required. 14. A view corridor has been created across the site from Carlsbad Boulevard on the east which is blocked by the proposed placement of the new buUding 46 (Recreational/Dining HaU). 6) RP 91-9/CDP 91-4 - ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY MASTER PLAN DECEMBER 18, 1991 PAGE 7 . BuUding 46 should be adjusted so that this view corridor can be extended to the coastline pursuant to the requirements of the Coastal Plan and the North Beach Design Guidelines which require that a minimum of 10 percent of the lot width be preserved as a view corridor. 15. Design guidelines created for the project should include appUcable recommendations of the North Beach Planning/Traffic Study dated AprU 1987. 16. Parking must be screened to the greatest extent feasible firom outside the property line by the use of a 36 inch berm or decorative waU along street front property lines. This impacts the surface parking lot in the area nearest to Carlsbad Boulevard as weU as the proposed parking stmcture. Screening of parking areas along side and rear lot lines must also be provided. 17. The application needs to address how the noise impacts of the proposed firing range wiU be mitigated. 18. Is housing which qualifies as affordable housing under City Standards proposed as part of the plan? If not, the project may be required to pay an in-Ueu fee. 19. What agreements are proposed with the City as part of the joint use of facUities and which facUities are involved? 20. The Conceptual Landscape Plan shows boUards on Cypress Avenue. Does the plan propose closing this street to pubUc vehicular access? Please clarify the intent regarding potential closing of Cypress Street on aU the project exhibits. This issue needs to be considered by Engineering, Planning and Redevelopment as to the issues such as a proposal raises. 21. Enclosed is a redlined set of project exhibits (date stamped November 21,1991) for your review and use. Please address all iteins identified on each sheet and submit these redlined exhibits with your revised plans to assist the project planner in the continued review of your project. ENGINEERING: 1. Entrance to parking stmcture lower level should be straight in at approximately 90° to the street/or radial. 2. Project boundaries are shown with bearings and distances that we can not verify. These bearings or distances do not appear in the title report, nor on any tract map, nor on the assessors plats nor on any City plans, some are inconect, such as the N. Une of Cypress, N-83°-28'-49"-E, 148.99. This Une is not a property Une we know anything about. The assessor's plat shows a "Del Mar Avenue" here with an entirely different line. The line shown as the easterly Une of Mountain is inconect near Pacific Avenue. RP 91-9/CDP 91-4 - ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY MASTER PLAN DECEMBER 18, 1991 ^ PAGE 8 ^ 3. The Exhibits should not show development on others property, that is the traUs shown on the ATScSF RaUway right-of-way. This is a sensitive issue with the raUway Company. You may show a "possible" or "proposed connection to proposed City traU system" but stop at the property Une. 4. The tunnel crossing is discouraged. The bridge wiU be supported by engineering. The PoUce Department should also be consulted. 5. On the opportunities and constraints exhibit the word "Vacate" is used. If this means vacation of a pubUc access (street, walk or alley) then street vacation procedures wiU need to be foUowed, by State Law. The "Vacate" shown for Beech Avenue near the railroad right-of-way is an issue as this route is proposed to be used by the North County Transit District. 6. The title report mentions a Certificate of CompUance (Article 39). We need a City C.C. number or a copy of the recorded instniment in order to review the document. 7. What type of vehicles (or their tuming radius) wiU access the maintenance facUity. 8. The Master Plan Text mentions that "assistance" wiU be needed for sidewalks. We have no knowledge of this. This project wUl be required to instaU aU pubUc improvements at it's cost. 9. The parking stmcture is mentioned as a "shared" stmcture and mention is made of City participation. We have no knowledge of this. A capital improvement project would be needed for either this or item 8 above. 10. We wiU require a dedication of additional right-of-way for Cypress Avenue, near Garfield Street and along the easterly line of Mountain View Drive. 11. Undergrounding of power transmission lines through the project wUl require coordination with S.D.G.ScE. 12. Coordination by the appUcant with the Coastal Coimnission is suggested for the issues of pubUc access to the beach and pubUc parking requirements. 6)