HomeMy WebLinkAboutCDP 96-14; Marja Acres PCS Facility; Coastal Development Permit (CDP) (6)City of Carlsbad
Planning Department
April 18, 1997
Steve Riley
JM Consulting Group, Inc.
3760 Kilroy Airport Way Suite 440
Long Beach, CA 90806
SUBJECT: MARJA ACRES PCS FACILITY - CDP 96-14
Per our conversation of this morning, I have begun the staff report for the above referenced
project and have requested a hearing date. Having reviewed your resubmittal of March 13, 1997,
the plans still require some corrections. I will need to receive these revised plan sets no later
than April 30,1997. A list of the required corrections is attached. Please contact me if you have
any questions.
ELAINE BLACKBURN
Associate Planner
EB:kr
Chris DeCerbo
Bobbie Hoder
File Copy
2O75 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92OO9-1576 - (619) 438-1161 • FAX (619) 438-O894
CORRECTIONS REQUIRED
1. Please delete Sheets S-l through S-5 of the latest submittal set from the next CDP
application set. These sheets will be useful for Building Permit plancheck only.
2. The patterns used on the Slope Analysis Sheet (C-2) are very faint on the latest set of
bluelines - so much so that some of them cannot be readily distinguished from each other.
This will need to be more clearly shown on the plan sets next submitted (for the Planning
Commissioners' use).
3. Slope Analysis Sheet C-2 (formerly Sheet C-l) should be corrected as follows:
The flat portion of the site (where the Country Store is located should be patterned and
numerically labeled as an Area "1" (0-15% slopes). It is currently not labeled
numerically and not patterned. Visually it appears to fall into the "40% or greater"
category, but it is in fact a generally flat area.
4. Topographic Map Sheet C-3 should be corrected as follows:
The "proposed location of antenna areas" has been changed from that shown on the
previous submittal (received on December 13, 1996) and from that shown on the CUP
approving plans (Sheet A-l of CUP approving plans). These previous plans had been
corrected to show the highest placed antenna at a maximum elevation of 80'9" and the
proposed fencing at elevations running from approximately 76' to 82'.88' to 92'6". The
latest plan set submittal (received March 13, 1997) shows the proposed fencing back at
88' to 92'6". This information must be revised back to match the CUP approved
locations and the previously submitted plans. (Note: Sheet A-l of the March 13
submittal shows the antennas and fencing at the correct elevations.)
5. The correct project number (CDP 96-14) has been added to the upper right-hand corner of
the plan sheets. However, the previous project numbers still appear on Sheets T-l, A-l
through A-4, and C-l through C-3 (generally in the lower right-hand corner). These old
project number should be deleted.
6. No further changes or unrequested changes to the number of sheets/exhibits submitted or
to the labeling of those sheets (A-l, C-3, etc.) should be made from this date forward.
As I indicated on the telephone, the staff report for this project has been started and any
changes to the number or labeling of the exhibits could result in confusion and/or errors
in the staff report and supporting documents.