Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCDP 97-41; Serenata; Coastal Development Permit (CDP) (7)January 281998 Jack Young Brehm - Aviara III Development Associates Suite 220 2835 Camino de1 Rio South San Diego CA 92108 SUBJECT: SDP 97-21/GDP 97-41- SERENATA - AVIARA PA 17 Thank you for applying for Land Use Permits in the City of Carlsbad. The Planning Department has reviewed the resubmittal of your Site development Plan and Coastal Development Permit, application no. SDP 97-21/GDP 97-41, as to its resolution of the issues of concern identified in the November 14, 1997 Planning Department correspondence. Some design issues still remain. The issues, listed below, must be addressed before the Planning Department can schedule the permits for public hearing. Enclosed are red-lined checkprints to augment the comments below. Please return these checkprints with your subsequent submittal. Please contact your staff planner, Michael Grim, at (760) 438-l 16 1, extension 4499, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincerely, . MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director MJH: MG:nm c: Gary Wayne Dennis Turner Clyde Wickham File Copy 2075 Las Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 - (760) 438-1161 l FAX (760) 438-0894 @ ISSUES OF CONCERN No. SDP 97-21/GDP 97-41- SERENATA - AVIARA PA 17 Planning: 1. There appears to be conflicting regulations in the master plan with regard to the minimum 25 foot setback to the Planning Area boundary. In most cases, this setback would not include the intervening roadway. If, in the case of Planning Area 17 the setback did include the roadway, there would be no required setback for any residential units along Ambrosia Lane (the units could actually be plotted at the right-of-way line). Conversely, if the 25 foot setback were applied from the roadway edge, two of the residential lots would be severely impaired. Staff recommends that you follow the precedent set in Planning Area 21 to the north and provide a 20 foot setback to Ambrosia Lane. 2. The required side yard setback of ten percent of the lot width is not being provided for the Lots 15, 16, 24,25, 33,36, 37, 38,39,40,41,44 and 47. Please revise to meet the R-l, Single Family standard. 3. Some of the side yard setbacks shown on the 1:40 scale plan used to be dimensioned at 5.0 feet and now show 6.0 feet, without any modification to the building size, location or lot dimensions. These side yards barely measure 6.0 feet, using the centerline of the building walls and property lines. This raises a concern to staff that the actual development may not meet the required setbacks. After reviewing the 1:20 scale drawing provided, it is clear that, for 30 of the side yard setbacks, measurements must be taken from the centerline of the building wall in order to meet the required setback. All setbacks are measured from the outside of the building wall, therefore once again recommends that you revise the plotting to meet the minimum dimensions. If all issues of concern are resolved and the project goes to the Planning Commission with a recommendation of approval, a condition will require on-site verification of setback conformance prior to issuance of any building permits. This process would likely require the certification of all residential pads and the surveying of each property line and proposed building foundation/wall locations prior to the issuance of building permits. . Engineering: 1. Please revise the legal description on Sheet 1 to correspond to the title report, dated November 24, 1997. 2. There are currently two projects by the name of Serenata. Please add the following project title to the top of the page on Sheet 1 and to the title block of each subsequent sheet: “Serenata - Aviara PA 17”. 3. The adjacent slopes along the rear of lots 33 through 46 need to be shown. There is an approved grading plan that shows this off-site slope. ISSUES OF CONCERN No. SDP 97-21/GDP 97-41- SERENATA - AVIARA PA 17 4. 5. 6. 7. Note 7 on Sheet 1 states that slopes shah be contour graded. Please show specifically which slopes are contour graded and how much grading is proposed (i.e., proposed volume of cut, fill, import and export), a grading permit could be required for this additional work. Note 10 contradicts this issue. The sight distance on Ambrosia Lane appears to be shorter than the minimum comer sight distance required (330 feet) and the area to remain unobstructed is unclear. The monument sign should be moved back behind the sight distance corridor mentioned above. The location or limits of the location should be shown on the site plan as well as the landscape plans to avoid confusion. The proposed driveways must be located in conformance with current Engineering Standards. Specifically, San Diego Regional Standard G-16 identifies the location and the minimum distance from property lines, utilities and other obstructions.