HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 91-07; La Vercia Condominiums; Tentative Map (CT) (37)ARC GROUP
5751 PALMER WAY STEH
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
CITY OF CARLSBAD Sept 10, 1991
Community Development
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859
Attn: Elaine Blackburn QFP 1 1 — -*
Re: La Vercia Condominiums w ~ laa '
CITY OF CARLSBADDear Ms Blackburn, DEVELOP. FROG. SERV' rjiv.
Enclosed you will find the information which you requested regarding the
preliminary reviews of La Vercia Condominiums. (It was originally
submitted under the name La Ventana then changed at the tentative map
submittal to La Vercia.)
I'm very concerned that the Planning Department is now considering that
the project be reduced from 5 units to 4 units. This has never been
mentioned as an issue in any of the submittals that have been made to the
City. In fact, it was requested by the City to increase the number of units
to 5 after review of the first preliminary submittal due to
inconsistencies with Zoning and the General Plan.
The project is within the RD-M (Multiple) zone, with a General Plan
designator of RH (High Density). This allows 15- 23 units per acre, 19
being the median. The properly is approximately 17,875 SF (0.41 acres).
This would allow for 7.79 units to be constructed. The proposal for 5
units equates to 12.18 units per acre, well below the minimum of 15
allowed. The Medium-High designator allows 8-15 units per acre, 11.5
being the median.
The site is constrained by its width which is compounded by the
requirements of the Planned Development Regulations. As was mentioned
in our meeting these regulations appear to have been written for larger
parcels of land and not with infill projects in mind.
I would again like to convey our concern to produce as nice a project as
possible within the constraints of Zoning and the General Plan. We have
suggested various materials, the introduction of additional landscaping,
and our willingness to work with staff to produce a project we both can
be proud of.
With the exception of the issue of the queuing distance, the submitted
proposal satisfies the concerns of both Planning and Engineering as they
relate to the Planned Development Regulations outlined in the City's letter
of May 31, 1991. The issue of the queuing distance can be mitigated and
the density falls well below that allowed. Therefore, the site should be
adequate for this type of development.
Sincerely,
Michael F. Dooley
cc Jim Davis
Donna Bernard
Skip Hammann
SEP 11 jgo,