HomeMy WebLinkAboutCDP 98-13; Rancho Real; Coastal Development Permit (CDP) (6)%%d d V&4
r
City of
<-2y-m
-____-
May 26, 1998
Mr. Charlie McLaughlin
Athalon Property Services Group
9227 Haven Avenue, Suite 225
Ranch0 Cucamonga, CA 9 1730
SUBJECT: CDP 98-13 - RANCH0 REAL
Since we have not been able to talk by phone about the necessary resubmittal for this
project, maybe this will help.
You will need to submit four (4) sets of revised/corrected plans. By four sets I mean four
individual sets of plans, each of which contains one of each of the plan sheets required.
(See list below.) PLEASE DO NOT SUBMIT 4 SETS OF ELEVATIONS IN ONE
PACKAGE, 4 SETS OF FLOOR PLANS IN ANOTHER PACKAGE, ETC. STAFF
CANNOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR REORGANIZING THE BUNDLES OF PLANS
INTO SETS. I have included some notes/information as needed in the list below since
one of the sheets submitted previously did not bear the correct/approved revision date and
some of the others were not received by the Planning staff. Of course, your resubmittal
must also address the Engineering issues previously identified.
1. As we discussed, your Sheet 2 (showing the conceptual drawing of a gated entry)
should be deleted since no gate was included in the originally approved plans.
Also, the Ranch0 Real approved exhibits 0, Q, R, S, and T (landscape plan,
hillside permit, constraints maps, and profiles) do not need to be included in your
submittal package.
2. “Site Plan PUD 90- 16 for Ranch0 Real Tentative Map CT 90-l 3”
The originally approved sheet was City-stamped as Planning Commission Exhibit
A dated 5/2/91. This Planning Commission-approved sheet bore a final revision
date of “4-19-91”. Planning staff did not receive a copy of this sheet in your first
CDP submittal. A similar sheet was submitted but it bears a last revision date of
“2-28-91”. Also, the sheet submitted is a reduced version. Because the reduction
makes much of the information unreadable, staff suggests you submit the full-
sized “4- 19-9 1” sheet.
3. “Ranch0 Real Tentative Map CT 90-13”
This sheet was City-stamped as Planning Commission Exhibit B dated 5/2/9 1.
2075 Las Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad. CA 92009-I 576 - (760) 438-1161 - FAX (760) 438-0894
CDP 9% 13 - RANCH0 RF- :
MAY 26, 1998
PAGE 2
A sheet bearing this title was submitted in your CDP application. It also appears
to be a reduced version of the approved sheet. As above, staff suggests you
submit the full-sized “4-19-91” sheet.
4. Approved architectural elevations (Sheets 6 - 14 of 14)
These sheets were City-stamped as Planning Commission Exhibits C - K dated
5/2/91. The sheets submitted in your first CDP submittal package were the
correct sheets. As you may know, the City has changed the way building height is
measured since this project was approved. It is now measured to the peak of the
roof instead of to the mid-point. Staff sfiggests you add a dimension showing the
building height to the peak onto the plans and include the date this information
was added next to the new dimension. This will clarify that the new height
dimension was added to the plans after the original project approval indicated by
the exhibit stamp date. ’
5. Approved floor plans (Sheets 3 - 5 of 14)
These sheets were City-stamped as Planning Commission Exhibits L - M dated
5/2/91. The sheets submitted in your first CDP submittal package did not have
the City’s exhibit stamp but appeared to be the correct sheets.
6. Approved “Set Back Map” (Sheet 1 of 1)
The approved sheet was City-stamped as Planning Commission Exhibit P dated
5/2/91. Planning staff did not receive a copy of this sheet in your CDP submittal.
7. Conceptual Grading Plan
Planning staff has not received a copy of this sheet.
If you have any questions, please call me at (760) 438-l 161, extension 4471.
ECAINE BLACKBURN
Senior Planner
C: Clyde Wickham
File