Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 97-17; Brindisi; Tentative Map (CT) (5)City of Carlsbad Planning Department November 24, 1998 Paula Lombardi Brehm-Aviara III Development Associates LP 2835 Camino Del Rio So Ste., 220 San Diego, CA 92108 SUBJECT:CT 97-17 -BRINDISI The preliminary staff report for the above referenced project is enclosed for your review. This preliminary report will be discussed by staff at the Development Coordinating Committee (DCC) meeting which will be held on December 7, 1998. A twenty (20) minute appointment has been set aside for you at 9:00 a.m. If you have any questions concerning your project you should attend the DCC meeting. If you need additional information concerning this matter, please contact your Planner, Ann Landers at (760) 438-1161, extension 4451, or you may contact your Engineer, Clyde Wickham at (760) 438-1161, extension 4353. CITY OF CARLSBAD GARY E. WAYNE Assistant Planning Director GEW-.ALteh File Copy 2O75 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92OO9-1 576 • (76O) 438-1161 • FAX (760) 438-O894 November 25, 1998 TO: Brian Stup FROM: Dee Landers NEW CONDITION - BRINDISI Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall be permitted to construct 6 model homes provided that: a) All grading and improvements required for the model homes are consistent with the approved tentative map; b) All grading, improvement and landscape plans for the model home area are approved prior to the issuance of building permits; c) Prior to issuance of any permits, a demolition bond is posted covering all expenses required to return the site to its previous, undeveloped condition should the map never final or be abandoned; and, d) All requirements of the Building, Water and Fire Departments be fulfilled, including the provision of sewer and water service. October 1, 1998 TO: ASSOCIATE ENGINEER, CLYDE WICKHAM From: Park Development Coordinator BRIND1SI / PA 19 AND ZONE 19 PARK SITE ISSUES I had a meeting with Chuck Moore of P&D Technologies who is facilitating, on behalf of Brehm Communities, resolution of issues we had concerning future access to the Park. He presented to me exhibits, prepared by Project Design Consultants and labeled "Exhibit A and Exhibit B; 9/29/98". These Exhibits show, to my satisfaction, that future access to the Park can be accommodated. Hopefully you also have seen these exhibits, and if not, let me know so that we can assure that your concerns on grading and drainage have been ameliorated. With this information, the Recreation Dept. can support the above mentioned project. I would, however, like to review the "final" submittal that will go to the Planning Commission to make sure it jives with the Exhibits above. Mark Steyaert attachment Recreation and Park Planning Manager Principal Planner, Landers I'/ r ,i/<. '< 7 / A N/X'.'/ c -<•'/ /.sv ///<•// Us i' I \ \ \ I N- < ; I \ ', 22 Years of Excellence, 1976-1998 File: 1310.19 September 29, 1998 Mr. Mark Steyaert CITY OF CARLSBAD Parks and Recreation 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008-1989 SUBJECT: PA 19 Park Site Boundary Dear Mark, Project Design Consultants is currently processing a Planned Development Plan and Tentative Map with the City of Carlsbad. The enclosed exhibits show the relationship between the proposed Brindisi (PA 19) site and the future park site. Exhibit A shows the proposed interim grading condition between the Brindisi (PA 19) site and the future park site. These grading concepts are based on previous meetings with Chuck Moore at P&D Consultants. Per previous discussions, no access road to the park site will be graded at this time, in order to eliminate any mischievous behavior on the park site. Based on the proposed grading concept, existing water mains will also remain undisturbed. Section A-A shows the relationship between the park site, wall location, and existing conditions. Exhibit B shows the relationship between the final park site grading and the existing Brindisi (PA 19) site. All future park site grades will tie into the previously graded Brindisi (PA 19) site. Existing water lines will be relocated based on the final park site grading. Future grading concepts are based on previous meetings with Chuck Moore at P&D Consultants. (See the enclosed Sketch A for the future park site concept plan.) Sincerely, Brian D. Stup, PE Project Engineer Enclosures c: Paula Lombardi - Brehm Communities Chuck Moore - P&D Consultants LET7131019PSB.DOC PROJECT REVIEW MEMO DATE: TO: ENGINEER: FROM: ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT NEW PROJECT D REVISED PROJECT D Planning Department REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND RESPONSE ON APPLICATION NUMBER(S): NOTE: Please use this number on all correspondence. PROJECT TITLE: PROPOSAL: //ft /y\ P / V 0 ' Please review and submit written comments (incompleteness items and issues of concern) or conditions of approval to _^ tixs-£-&— , the Project Planner in the Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, by . State Law requires that the applicant be notified of any incompleteness items and issues of concern in writing within 30 days of receipt of the project submittal. This submittal was received on . Therefore, the completeness/issues letter must be mailed out by . If the planner has not received your items/issues by two (2) days before the necessary mail-out date, it will be assumed that you have no incompleteness items or issues of concern or that they will be sent out under separate cover by the Engineering Department at a later date. If you have any questions, please contact the Project Planner at 438-1161, extension . THANK YOU U (J /! PLANS ATTACHED ' (J FRM26 -12/97 ftitv of Carlsbad Public Works — Engineering PROJECT DESIGN CONSULTANTS 701 "B" STREET, SUITE 800 SAN DIEGO, CA 92101 ATTN.: BRIAN STUPP CT 97-17 / PUD 97-15, / CDP 97-46 / LCPA 97-10 / MPA 177(W): BRINDISI Engineering Department staff has completed the review of the above-referenced project and was ready to condition the project based on a few minor changes and last minute corrections. Upon submitting my recommendations and after going over the project with my supervisor it became apparent that fundamental details and basic information is missing from the tentative map. Auto-Cad layers may have been turned off, numbers erased and not redrawn, and issues that were resolved but not drawn on the plan need to be corrected. Whatever the excuse, the project must contain the required information and design prior to recommendation of approval. The plans do not reflect a clear design. Here's a few questions I tried to answer today: • Find the subdivision boundary ? • Why does the subdivision boundary run off the sheet ? and where does it go ? • Why does the subdivision boundary follow a previously dedicated road (Ambrosia Lane) ? • The tentative map calls out 8 lots. Find them? What are the dimensions? Do they comply with access, utility, and Map Act requirements ? • Identify the easement that drains the public park ? What size is the public storm drain ? • The cover sheet notes 3 "units" ? These are "building" type units not subdivision units. Right? Issues to keep in mind: • The proposed drainage system and water system will be public in certain areas. The easement criteria is 20' wide for single facility and 30' for double facility. • The storm drain "trunk" line will be 18" minimum and be public from park site through this subdivision and connecting to existing public storm drain in Cassia Road. • The proposed phasing and map recordation units are unclear. The tentative map should be very clear and should show 1 unit final map with 8 proposed lots. The actual phasing of construction (buildings) should be shown on another sheet to avoid confusion. • The Covenant of Easement or private drainage easement for yard drains should be identified with 15' min. width called out. I have attached a red-lined check print of corrections needed to complete this tentative review. If you/fWe\rv^questions, please feel free to contact me at (760) 438-1161 ext. 4353. CLY^E WICKHAM Associate Engineer - Land Use Review c: Principal Engineer Land Use Review Division 2O75 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 • (76O) 438-1161 • FAX (760) 431-5769 f- 1 2835 ^^ SAN DIEGO • CAMINO DEL RIO SOUTI^B CALIFORNIA 92108-3882 SUITE 220 ^^ 619293-7090 FAX 619 293-3056 THE B^EHM^ COMPANIES RECEIVED August 20, 1998 rvi" &UG 2 0 1998 Adrienne Landers **aQi ' CITY OF CARLSBAD Qlff OF CArU-_ Planning Department ^ pLANN^G Dfe»* 1 RLAflRfNG DEPL 2075 Las Palmas Drive r*-*^ Carlsbad, CA 92009 RE: MPA 177(W) / LCPA 97-10 / CT 97-17 / PUD 97-15 / CDP 97-46 BRINDISI COMPLETENESS & ISSUES REVIEW Enclosed with this letter are revised plans and documents in satisfaction of the issues and comments listed in your letter dated June 16, 1998. The intent of this letter is to provide specific responses to the comments identified in your Completeness & Issues Review letter. The following numbered response items reference the numbers identified in the comments letter. It is my understanding that we have responded to all Planning and Engineering issues listed in your May 26, 1998 letter. The "P" size vehicle turnaround issue was resolved with a field ^demonstration showing that vehicles can make the necessary turns. The only negative is that the courtyard tree was deleted. Brehm is attempting to see if we can increase landscaping inside the courtyard. The other outstanding issue of the May 26th letter was the turnaround at the entry. Through various meetings, phone calls and exhibits it is my understanding that the shifting to a two gate system has eliminated this objection by Engineering. June 16, 1998 letter Engineering Comments 1. Park Grading Issues - through exhibits and meetings with Mark Steyeart, the Park issues have been resolved. The basic agreement is that Brehm will install a 5 foot masonry boundary wall per City of Carlsbad standard at the boundary between PA 19 and the park site. Brehm will also grade an area approximately 5 foot on the Park side of the boundary wall relatively flat. At the five foot hinge point Brehm will grade at a 2:1 slope to daylight. Per discussions with Mark Steyeart, an access path to the park will not be graded at this time, in order to eliminate any possible mischievous behavior on the park site. The boundary area will be graded per the detail on the plans. Page 1 of2 Page 2 of2 Any drainage from the park site towards the boundary wall will be collected and tie into the drainage along the East Boundary of PA19. This will allow the park some future date to grade the park site without having to obtain approval of any HOA or individual owner. This agreement is based upon meeting between Chuck Moore and Mark Steyeart. Revised PDF show the agreed upon grading. 2. Pedestrian access (i.e. ramps) have been indicated on the plans. 3. Revised entry has resolved the entry gate issues. The revised gates provide a P-car turn- around area per detail on the plans. 4. Typical courtyard tree has been deleted to allow conformance with egress and exiting of courtyard by "P" size vehicles. (Resolved per meeting and site demonstration with Clyde Wickham & Bob Wojcik). Sewer: 1. Note has been added indicating the fact that sewer clean outs and laterals can not be located in driveways. Drainage: 1. Drainage study has been revised as requested. (Area drains convert to the private system located in the private streets). 2. A note was added to the tentative map and the planned development plan to "remove the existing pipe". 3. The revised plans show the park site as resolved by Chuck Moore and Mark Steyeart. Revised plans show the proposed park site grading and drainage improvements. (See section A-A on both plan sets for a cross section detail). All drainage issues will be addressed in the revised drainage study. Very truly yours, THE BKSHM COMPANIES ^arry Noreeir, Vice President of Development LN:jw Project Design Consultants PLANNING. E N G I N K K RING S U K V K Y I N G 22 Years of Excellence, 1976-1998 File: 1310.19 August 20, 1998 Mr, Clyde Wickham CITY OF CARLSBAD Engineering Department 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: Planning Area 19 (Brindisi) Park Site Issues Dear Clyde: Project Design Consultants has revised the park site boundary for the Planned Development Plans and Tentative Map for Planning Area 19. These revisions are based on a meeting between Mark Steyaert at the Parks and Recreation Department and Chuck Moore at P&D Technologies. The following revisions have been made to the Park Site/Brindisi boundary area. ' * i • 1. See Exhibit "A" for the conceptual future park site condition. (Prepared by P&D Technologies on July 29,1998.) 2. All water lines will be relocated by the City of Carlsbad, upon the commencement of future park site grading. A 30-foot water easement will be located north of Planning Area 19. (See Exhibit A.) 3. A 5-foot masonry wall will be located within the Planning Area 19 boundary. (See Exhibit "C", prepared by P&D Technologies on July 29, 1998.) Emergency overflow will be provided through the wall near the easterly boundary. LET/131019-818.DOC , 701 , San Diego 619-235-6471 •. , fa Recycled B Street California . FAX 234-0349 . ' , paPer Suite 800 92101 Emailconsults@projectdesign.com Mr. Clyde Wickham August 20,1998 Page 2 4. Brehm Communities will grade 5 feet into the park site and then daylite at a slope of 2:1. (See Exhibit C.) An access road to the park site will not be graded at this time in order to eliminate the possibility of mischievous behavior on the park site. If you have any questions, or need additional information, please contact our office. Sincerely, Brain D.Stup, PE Project Engineer Enclosures c: Mark Steyaert — Carlsbad Parks and Recreation Adrienne Landers -City of Carlsbad Planning Richmond O'Neill - Brehm Chuck Moore - P&D Technologies Dale Greenhalgh - Project Design Consultants LET/131019-818.DOC . fc .uJATfcK. fe SPECIFICATIONS FOR Wood and Masonry Fences CITY OF SAN DI8GD BUILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT 1222 FIRST AVENUE. MS 301. SAN DIEGO, CA 92101 Cat (619) 236-6405 tdrappointmBnLs and (619) 236-6270 for information INFORMATION BULLETIN 223 July 1932 Construction of masonry or wood fences six feet or leas in height and not supporting surcharge does not require a permit from the City of San Diego Building Inupection Department. However, itisregulated ^V the 1091 Uniform Building Coda as amended by the City of San Diego. This information bulletin outlines the city's requirements. Information Bulletin 220 contains infor- mation on how to obtain retaining wall permits. Infor- mation Bulletins 221 and 222 covet retaining walls with level and eloping backfill. Fence heights are also regulated by the zoning Iftw3 of the city. Pot specific information about the toning regulation* for your fence on your lot, call Zoning Services at (619) 236-6490, L JENCE HEIGHT Pence height is measured from the top of the footing to the top of the wall. IL MASONRY FENCE SPECIFICATIONS Ifasonry fences rosy be constructed using the speci- fications listed below. A. Use the following mix requirements when con- structing a masonry fence. Note that the use of plastic cement it not permitted in masonry fences located in. Seismic Zone No. 3 or 4. 1. Concrete mix for footing? must have a compres- sive strength of f \ * 2,000 psi minimum, or the following proportions by volume: 1 part Portland cement 2Vj parts sand 3V., parts a/,-inch maximum diameter gravel 7 gallons water maximum per sack of cement 2. Mortar mix must have a coxnpreaoive strength equal to l.flOO psi minimum. On« possible mix contains the following proportions by volume: 1 part Portland cement . 3V, parts sand V, part hydrated lime or lime putty 3. Grout must have a eomprecei ve strength equal to 2,000 psi minimum. One possible mix contains the following proportions by volume: 1 part Portland cement 3 parts sand 2 parts pea gravel (V^inch aggregate) Add water until pouring consistency is achieved without segregation of the grout constituents. Rod or vibrate immediately. Rerod or Tevjbratc grout about 10 minutes after placement to insure adequate consoljdation- Stop grout 2 inches from top of masonry units when grouting of second lift is to be continued at another time. FlflUro 1/ Masonry fence Mortar or masonry< 2* minimum to 6' maximum «r3 horizontal bar at 16 inches on center Locate vertical sisal at center of wall Reinforcing sioel lapped 15 inches for #3 bars, 20 inches for *4 bars »3 or #4 barcontinuous 12- minimum B. All blocks must be Type *N" grouted wherever reinforcing occurs, C. Table A contains reinforcing stop] requirement* for various masonry wallc. feinfbrdng steel must be deformed and comply with ASTM specifications A616- 8S, Grade 40. vThen theuse of one continuous bar is not possible, alap or splice of *0 bar diameters is required. D. Amortarkeymustbeformedbyembeddingaflat 2x4 flush with and at the top of the freshly placed footing to insure proper bonding between the footing and the first course ofblock- It chouldbe removed after the concrete has started to harden (about 1 hour). A mortar key may be omitted if the first course of block is set into the fresh concrete when the footing ie placed and a good bond is obtained. E. Table A also contains dimensional requirementc for masonry wall footings. All footings must extend at least 12 inches into undisturbed natural soil or com- P/2'd PIP '215-841-07 5.0' / A,PJ\L 215-841-01 FUTURE PARK SITE 3.0' -"FREESTANDING" 'MASONRY WALL FOOTING PER THE CITY OF. SAN DIEGO BULLETIN /223 15.0' MIN. PAD SECTION A-A NOT TO SCALE BUILDING FINISHED FLOOR * n City of Carlsbad Planning Department June 16,1998 Richmond O'Neill Brehm Communities Suite 220 2835 Camino del Rio South San Diego, CA 92108 R B C P I y p JUN 1 7 1998 THE bhcriivi SUBJECT: MPA 177(W)/LCPA 97-10/CT 97-17/PUD 97-15/CDP 97-46: BRINDISI COMPLETENESS & ISSUES REVIEW On March 9, 1998, you were informed that the above-listed applications were deemed complete. However, I had forgotten there was a Local Coastal Plan Amendment on this site pending before the Coastal Commission. This meant that your project could not be deemed complete until the legislative action had been approved. The subject amendment was approved by the Commission on June 9, 1998 which then became your Complete Date. This revised Complete Date will not affect the processing of your project In addition to the comments the Planning Department sent you in my letter of May 26, 1998, the Engineering Department has additional items related to your last submittal. Engineering Department staff has completed another review of the above-referenced project for resolution of issues. Engineering issues which remain and need to be resolved or adequately addressed prior to staff making a determination on the proposed project are as follows: 1. The previously-approved grading plan shows an interim cul-de-sac slope and temporary access road; show proposed disposition of this plan. Check with Mark Steyeart (434-2824 x-2855) regarding grading of Park property. The park access, and the proposed grading have not been resolved. The latest tentative map revision is unclear exactly what is proposed to be graded and what is considered "existing". City Standards GS 14 and GS 15 identify setbacks and drainage details that should be shown on this plan. 2. Please indicate pedestrian access (i.e., ramps) on all street corners with sidewalk. 2075 La Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 • (760) 438-1161 • FAX (760) 438-O894 r-WCT 97-17/PUD 97-15/CDP 97-46: BKWMPA 177(W)/LCPA 97-IWCT 97-17/PUD 97-15/CDP 97-46: BRINDISI COMPLETENESS & ISSUES REVIEW June 16,1998 Page 2 3. The gated entry is still an issue. The design changes made pushed the turnaround area closer to Ambrosia Lane and did not improve the access, turnaround or queuing issue at the entrance. The detail and the plan view does not match the typical cross section on sheet one of both the PD and the TM. To clarify the issue, if you would widen the entrance to allow two lanes in and one lane out that would be acceptable. If you would check the "P" vehicle turnaround at the median/visitor call location you will see that a turn is impossible, unless a three-point maneuver is used. An offset bulb would be acceptable because the turn is only in one direction. 4. The typical courtyard (sixplex) on sheet 1 of the PD does not show the proposed 6' tree well in the middle. The remaining dimension 10' on each side is not identified. The turn around detail on the landscape plan should include all 8 moves (in and out) of the units. The "P" vehicle turn radius is 24' minimum with a 25.8' maximum overhang and a minimum 15.3 turn radius. The Volvo sedan used on the landscape plan is too small and not an AASHTO or CalTrans standard. Sewer: 1. Please indicate sewer laterals from the proposed buildings to public sewer facilities. Show or note that sewer clean outs and laterals are not located in driveways. Show water laterals and meter locations similar to sewer services with the same restrictions. A note on the drainage detail or typical will address this issue. Drainage: 1. The drainage study submitted did not validate or determine storm drain facilities as requested (page 1 of study). Please revise or add to the report and consider the private drain system along top of slope of Poinsettia Lane. The area drains are subject to clogging and slope failure is eminent. We recommend a connection into the existing storm in Poinsettia Lane near the water line connection east of Ambrosia Lane to reduce overflowing issues and to improve the condition. An overflow in this area would have less of an impact (less slope) than at Cassia Road. 2. Please show the existing RCP on the corner of Cassia Road and Poinsettia Lane as "to be removed" or connect the private yard drain system to it. 3. It appears that a portion of the adjacent City Park drains through this site, a Brow ditch type "F" inlet and an easement/public storm drain should be shown. The approved grading plan for this site also shows a D-25 curb outlet on Ambrosia Lane not identified on this plan MPA 177(W)/LCPA 97^/CT 97-17/PUD 97-15/CDP 97-46: BRINDISI COMPLETENESS & ISSUES REVIEW June 16,1998 Page 3 Attached is a red-lined check print of the proposed project for the applicants use in making the requested revisions. This check print must be returned along with the first review, to facilitate continued staff review. If you or the applicant have any questions, please contact Clyde Wickham at 438-1161, extension 4353. Sincerely, Adrienne Landers Principal Planner AL:mh Clyde Wickham Bob Wojcik Bobbie Hoder Data Entry File Copy PROJECT REVIEW MEMO DATE: TO: ENGINEER: FROM: ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT NEW PROJECT REVISED PROJECT Planning Department REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND RESPONSE ON APPLICATION NUMBER(S) NOTE: Please use this number on all correspondence. PROJECT TITLE: PROPOSAL: Please review and submit written comments (incompleteness items and issues of concern) or conditions of approval to /Ly JL^— , the Project Planner in the Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, by /(J)(/0 • State Law requires that the applicant be notified of any incompleteness items and issues of concern in writing within 30 days of receipt of the project submittal. This submittal was received on £ 1^0 . Therefore, the~eempleteness/issues letter-mast be mailed out by PU\ ^ If the planner has not received your items/issues by two (2) days before the necessary mail-out date, it will be assumed that you have no incompleteness items or issues of concern or that they will be sent out under separate cover by the Engineering Department at a later date. If you have any questions, please contact the Project Planner at 438-1161, extension ^/^S ( . THANK YOU PLANS ATTACHED FRM26 -12/97 City of Carlsbad Planning Department September 22, 1998 Richmond O'Neill Brehm Communities Suite 220 2835 Camino del Rio South San Diego, CA 92108 SUBJECT: MPA 177(W)/LCPA 97-10/CT 97-17/PUD 97-15/CDP 97-46: BRINDISI ISSUES REVIEW I am conveying to you the latest comments from the Engineering Department. The master plan text was not earlier transmitted to Engineering, because none of the changes related to that department; however, to cover all the bases I have now sent that information. I have included the revisions as I understand them. Please review and send me your comments so we can resolve this issue. It appears that grading is still unresolved as well as a minor drainage issue. Please contact me as soon as these matters are cleared up and agreed to by the Parks and Recreation Department. One other item that needs to show up as a separate exhibit is the delineation of the exclusive use areas and the common areas. All common areas should be identified as a separate lot/s. A portion of the exclusive use areas is highlighted in pink on the Engineering exhibit. This is a sample of what should be included on the exhibit. The internal streets should also be shown as a separate lot. Sincerely, ADRIENNE LANDERS Principal Planner AL:mh Enc: Memo from Engineering, dated 9/17/98 Red-lined check print Revised master plan text c: Clyde Wickham Mark Steyeart 2075 La Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92OO9-1576 • (76O) 438-1161 • FAX (760) 438-0894 Memorandum TO: Senior Planner, Adrienne Landers / FROM: Associate Engineer, Clyde DATE: September 17, 1998 MPA 177(W)/LCPA 97-10/CT 97-17/PUD 97-15/CDP 97-46: BRINDISI 3rd or 4th REVIEW Engineering Department staff has completed yet another review of the above-referenced project. The recent submittals for our review have included the master plan amendment as part of the project # but no text or amendment information has been submitted. Same for the LCPA portion of the application. I believe the master plan amendment is supposed to include a strike- out version and a revised text & description or plat if applicable. If you have this please submit a copy for our review. The major Engineering issue that remains and needs to be resolved is grading of the park site. It is my understanding that Parks has not supported this design. I have read memo's from the developer but have not seen support or response from Parks & Recreation. To help expedite this project, I have proceeded with review as if we agree to disagree. Ideally this issue should be resolved before your department schedules the project for Commission & Council approval. These are comments from my last review: 1. The previously approved grading plan shows an interim cul de sac slope and temporary access road, show proposed disposition of this plan. Check with Mark Steyart (434-2824 x-2855) regarding grading of Park property. The park access, and the proposed grading have not been resolved. The latest tentative map revision is unclear exactly what is proposed to be graded and what is considered "existing". The City Standard GS 14 and GS 15 identify setbacks and drainage details that should be shown on this plan. 3. It appears that a portion of the adjacent City Park drains through this site, a Brow ditch type "F" inlet and an easement / public storm drain should be shown. The approved grading plan for this site also shows a D-25 curb outlet on Ambrosia Lane not identified on this plan. Attached is a red-lined check print of the proposed project for the applicants use in making the requested revisions. This check print must be returned to facilitate continued staff review. This •9-r3- 8.62 acre planning area includes multi-family attached residential units. The neighborhood is located on the northerly side of Poinsettia Lane along the easterly boundary of the Master Plan area. Pacific Rim Park of Planning Area 32 is adjacent to the west and north side of the planning area. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: PD All development in Planning Area 19 shall conform to the development standards of the PD Ordinance (Carlsbad Municipal Code, Chapter 21.45.090) unless otherwise stated in this chapter. USE ALLOCATION: /~ 9° HH multi-family residentia Control Point (11.7 DU/AC)./ Private recreation facilities are required in conjunction with the residential units. .- rr\ /wunits are allowed by the Growth Management PERMITTED USES: Multi-family residential housing Recreational facilities. SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: Height: The maximum height in this planning area shall not exceed 35- 30 feet. All heights shall be determined per Section 21.04.065 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.gtruetui-ca shall not exceed 20 feet in height within 50 feet of the park: — At least 50% All of the structures in this Planning Area shall be no more than two stories in height. Where three atoiry atrueturea are proposed, no more than one half of the structure shall be three atorico in height. Setbacks_L The minimum setback from the Poinsettia Lane right-of-way shall be -50- 40 feet for structures and 30 feet for open parking. All open parking shall be fully screened from Poinsettia Lane. The minimum front yard setback along "Z" Street Ambrosia Lane shall be 20 feet for structures and 15 feet for open parking. No direct garage access shall be taken from -"*"• a Lane. •"TFy^antyard f'Pfrh'a^V'0 — f-rom ot-hg-r gt--n=.pi-g — a»d — driven ifnrrmn with m i 1c.PQn(h) rf *-hT MMTTJ " Gt h r±l The minimum setback along the easterly planning area boundary shall be -&0- 15 feet from the top of slope for structures and ^6—feet—£&¥• open parking. The minimum setback from the park shall be 30 feet. All undeveloped areas adjacent to the park shall be landscaped and well maintained. All open parking shall be screened from the park site and Poinsettia Lane. The minimum building separation shall be 20 feet. Frontyard setbacks along the internal street are established as follows: 50% of the structure immediately adjacent to the street must maintain a minimum 20' frontyard setback; the remaining 50% of the structure immediately adjacent to the street may have a 10' frontyard setback if the garage is sideloaded per Exhibit V-20-a, dated 9/28/98. Garage court designs shall maintain a minimum 36 foot garage door to garage door separation. A minimum distance of eet fr°m livable space to livable space shall be maintained. parking: Parking shall conform to the standards of Chapter 21.44 of the Carlsbad Mun i cipa1 Code. SPECIAL DESIGN CRITERIA: Resign : All community-wide design standards described in Section A of Chapter IV shall be embodied in the architecture of this planning area. The following specific guidelines shall also be included for this planning area: * Buildings in thio neighborhood shall relate atr-ongly to the sloping site and shall avoid large flat pad arcaa by the iiieoi-pegatiein of stepped building footprints. * Curvilinear streets shall be combined with varied building setbacks to strengthen the mediterranean hilltown appearance of the planning area. * Strong architectural relief features shall be incorporated into all structures visible from Poinsettia Lane and the adjacent parkland . * Outdoor courtyards, patios, decks and plazas shall be included. * Special attention shall be given to incorporate the adjacent park areas as an amenity to the neighborhood. Entry Treatment : A major entry way shall be located at the intersection of Poinscttia Ambrosia Lane and "-a-* — Street th« private internal street. Fencing : Traffic noise along Poinsettia Lane shall be attenuated if required through the incorporation of a solid masonry or view-thru noise wall, earthen berm or combination of the two. An open fence or wall shall be located along the planning area boundary adjacent to the park site. A decorative solid fence or view-thru wall shall/ be located along the easterly planning area boundary. Landscape : All community-wide landscape standards described in Section A, Community Design Elements of Chapter IV shall be incorporated into this planning area. In addition, the following specific landscape concepts shall be included in the development of this planning area: * Common streetscape areas shall conform to community requirements. Street trees, landscape planting intensity zones, paving, entry monuments, irrigation systems, walls, fences, lighting, etc., have been pre-determined to provide consistency in design and quality. 145 * Landscaping and berming shall be required to screen all structures and open parking from Poinsettia Lane, the adjacent park to the north and the adjacent property to the east. * Existing trees identified during Master Tentative Map review shall be preserved. * A fire suppression zone subject to the approval of the Planning Director and Fire Marshall shall be established between native/naturalized areas and structures. The fire suppression plan should incorporate structural setbacks from native areas in combination with a program of selective thinning of native vegetation subject to the approval of the Planning Director. •* Where parking lota are provided, a minimum 320 aquai?e foot landscaped island shall be provided for every ten parking spaeea. Street Trees; The dominant street tree along Poinsettia Lane shall be London Plane Tree (Platanus acerifolius) and the support tree shall be the Southern Magnolia (Magnolia grandiflora) or an alternate selected by the developer. Onen Space: Manufactured slope areas shall be maintained by the community open space district. Grading: Any development within this planning area shall comply with the City's Hillside Development Regulations and the slope and resource preservation policies of the underlying local coastal program and subsequent coastal permit. Any application for development within this planning area shall require a slope analysis/biological resource map during Tentative Map review. Affordable Ilouaina: If Planning Area 10 ia utiliacd te aatiafy Aviara'a obligation for Ineluaienai-y Affordable Ilouaing, the above development atnndai-da and Dpeeial Design criteria may be waived or modified na approved by the City. 146 V City of Carlsbad ^^^^^ ^VP^^. r ^^ft^^m ^ ^^^^jp^jg^^^^^g^^m^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^g^^^^^^^^p^m^m^^m^mPlanning Department July 8, 1998 Richmond O'Neill Brehm Communities Suite 220 2835 Camino Del Rio South San Diego, CA 92108 SUBJECT: MPA 177(W)/LCPA 97-10/CT 98-17/PUD 97-15/CDP 97-46 BRINDISI This morning I received a memo from the Parks and Recreation Department expressing concern with the grading proposed for the Brindisi project. Mark Steyaert indicated that his department cannot support the project as it is currently proposed. He reiterated the fact that the City had a previous agreement with Hilman to lower the pad elevations for the park to provide better public accessibility. Apparently, that grading was postponed again and again and never completed. Unfortunately, this now becomes your problem since you want to develop the subject'site. The Engineering Department has also reviewed the memo from the Parks Department. Clyde Wickhams's comments are provided below. This issue must be resolved to everyone's satisfaction prior to scheduling the project for Planing Commission. We have received an interoffice memo concerning the design and support of CT 97 - 17/Planning Area 19. The memo is in response to the recent submittal which was contrary to Mark Steyeart's understanding of our last meeting with him, the applicant's design team and planning/engineering staff where we discussed inclusion of the park parameter into this design. The applicant also discussed the idea of actually grading the adjacent park parameter to insure compatibility. A few weeks later the design team decided to "pull back all grading efforts at the parameter and leave the correction or resolution of mismatched grades and access to others". "Others" means in the future a contractor would grade access to the park, lower the property at the cul-de-sac about 8' and remove a slope up to a slope down along the common property line (in the industry this is called a hog-back ridge). The applicant's design as a "stand alone" concept includes retaining walls that would not be necessary if the overall site was graded correctly. The applicant's design as a "stand alone" project also drains a portion of the park site through an internal, private system, again an afterthought mutation of standard design. 2O75 La Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 • (760) 438-1161 • FAX.(760) 438-O894 MPA 177(W)/LCPA 97-107CT 98-17/PUD 97-15/CDP 97-46 BRINDISI July 8, 1998 Page 2 The Parks position is the same as it was a few months ago: show us how this design is compatible with our park site and show us that this design will not preclude development and access. On the surface it appears that the proposed design will lessen the developable area of an already reduced park site. Finally, Mark's memo brings up an important issue. We (the City) gave up land to increase developable land for this planning area. We (the City) gave permission to grade the park site and "blend" grades into natural condition. And now Parks is not willing to support the Brindisi project which could be considered a taking of developable park property. The proposed subdivision should show access to the parks site as well as ultimate grading along the south east boundary adjacent to this project. As we discussed in our meeting a week ago perhaps a potential solution could be to allow a blanket "future grading easement" over the adjacent border to allow for future correction of the grading problem. The approved grading plan for this area is significantly different than constructed. There may be more work contemplated by Hilman Properties or perhaps a reimbursement planned for the applicant's correction of this error. The applicant may want to contact Hilman Properties in this regard. Please contact Clyde Wickham at 438-1161, extension 4451 or Mark Steyaert 434-2824, extension 2855 for further details. Sincerely, Adrienne Landers Principal Planner AL:dch Attachment Clyde Wickham Mark Steyeart PLANNING SYSTEMS LAND USE / COASTAL PLANNING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE POLICY AND PROCESSING ' ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION July 1,1998 Ms. Adrienne Landers Principal Planner CITY OF CARLSBAD 2075 Las Palmas Dr. Carlsbad, CA 92009 RE: BRINDISI, Justification for Reduced Setbacks Dear Dee: Enclosed please find the proposed revised Aviara Master Plan pages 143,145 and 146. No significant changes to what you had previously review are proposed. In, addition, the following are justification for the two reduced perimeter setbacks proposed as part of the Brindisi project. . . f . Poinsettia Lane Setback Existing: The minimum setback from Poinsettia Lane shall be 50 feet for structures and 30 feet for open parking. s Proposed: The minimum setback from Poinsettia Lane shall be 40 feet for both structures and open parking. \ •\ Justification: City of Carlsbad Standards dictate the following building setbacks for arterial roadways as follows: Prime Arterial - 50 ft. Major Arterial - 40 ft. Secondary Arterial - 30 ft. These setbacks were adopted City-wide (except where master or specific plans dictated otherwise) after the subject Aviara Master Plan wording was approved (1986). The proposed setback wording is consistent with the new Citywide policy for setbacks for Poinsettia Lane (major arterial). 2111PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD • SUITE 100 • CARLSBAD, CA 92009 • (760)931-0780 • FAX (760) 931-5744 4 In addition, the vertical difference between the Brindisi site (higher) and Poinsettia Lane (lower) also adds to the physical and visual separation between the two uses. \ • Easterly Planning Area Boundary Setback Existing: The minimum setback along the easterly planning area boundary shall-be 50 feet for structures and 40 feet for open parking. Proposed: The minimum setback along the easterly planning area boundary shall be 15 feet from the top of slope for structures and open parking. ( ' / Justification: The proposed Brindisi design includes only two-story units, which is a lower profile than that previously allowed by the v Master Plan for Planning Area 19. As a result the proposed units will not hover over adjacent development to the east. No open parking is proposed in this area in the Brindisi plan-. Also, the Poinsettia Hill development was approved by the City with adjacent setbacks equal to that proposed for Brindisi. There is no substantive reason why the Brindisi setback should be greater than the Poinsettia Hill setback. The building separation between the two developments will be over 40 feet minimum. This is determined to be a sufficient separation between two fully compatible developments. No other perimeter setback revisions are proposed. Please contact me if you have any further questions or comments regarding these matters. Sincerely, aulJ.Klukas ^ Director of Planning cc: Richmond O'Neill Attachment FLAMMING SYSTEMS City of Carlsbad Planning Department June 16,1998 Richmond O'Neill Brehm Communities Suite 220 2835 Camino del Rio South San Diego, CA 92108 SUBJECT: MPA 177(W)/LCPA 97-10/CT 97-17/PUD 97-15/CDP 97-46: BRINDISI COMPLETENESS & ISSUES REVIEW On March 9, 1998, you were informed that the above-listed applications were deemed complete. However, I had forgotten there was a Local Coastal Plan Amendment on this site pending before the Coastal Commission. This meant that your project could not be deemed complete until the legislative action had been approved. The subject amendment was approved by the Commission on June 9, 1998 which then became your Complete Date. This revised Complete Date will not affect the processing of your project In addition to the comments the Planning Department sent you in my letter of May 26, 1998, the Engineering Department has additional items related to your last submittal. Engineering Department staff has completed another review of the above-referenced project for resolution of issues. Engineering issues which remain and need to be resolved or adequately addressed prior to staff making a determination on the proposed project are as follows: 1. The previously-approved grading plan shows an interim cul-de-sac slope and temporary access road; show proposed disposition of this plan. Check with Mark Steyeart (434-2824 x-2855) regarding grading of Park property. The park access, and the proposed grading have not been resolved. The latest tentative map revision is unclear exactly what is proposed to be graded and what is considered "existing". City Standards GS 14 and GS 15 identify setbacks and drainage details that should be shown on this plan. 2. Please indicate pedestrian access (i.e., ramps) on all street corners with sidewalk. 2075 La Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 • (760) 438-1161 • FAX (76O) 438-0894 -^^^^ JMPA 177(W)/LCPA 97-WPCT 97-17/PUD 97-15/CDP 97-46: BRINDISI COMPLETENESS & ISSUES REVIEW June 16, 1998 Page 2 3. The gated entry is still an issue. The design changes made pushed the turnaround area closer to Ambrosia Lane and did not improve the access, turnaround or queuing issue at the entrance. The detail and the plan view does not match the typical cross section on sheet one of both the PD and the TM. To clarify the issue, if you would widen the entrance to allow two lanes in and one lane out that would be acceptable. If you would check the "P" vehicle turnaround at the median/visitor call location you will see that a turn is impossible, unless a three-point maneuver is used. An offset bulb would be acceptable because the turn is only in one direction. 4. The typical courtyard (sixplex) on sheet 1 of the PD does not show the proposed 6' tree well in the middle. The remaining dimension 10' on each side is not identified. The turn around detail on the landscape plan should include all 8 moves (in and out) of the units. The "P" vehicle turn radius is 24' minimum with a 25.8' maximum overhang and a minimum 15.3 turn radius. The Volvo sedan used on the landscape plan is too small and not an AASHTO or CalTrans standard. Sewer: 1. Please indicate sewer laterals from the proposed buildings to public sewer facilities. Show or note that sewer clean outs and laterals are not located in driveways. Show water laterals and meter locations similar to sewer services with the same restrictions. A note on the drainage detail or typical will address this issue. Drainage: 1. The drainage study submitted did not validate or determine storm drain facilities as requested (page 1 of study). Please revise or add to the report and consider the private drain system along top of slope of Poinsettia Lane. The area drains are subject to clogging and slope failure is eminent. We recommend a connection into the existing storm in Poinsettia Lane near the water line connection east of Ambrosia Lane to reduce overflowing issues and to improve the condition. An overflow in this area would have less of an impact (less slope) than at Cassia Road. 2. Please show the existing RCP on the corner of Cassia Road and Poinsettia Lane as "to be removed" or connect the private yard drain system to it. 3. It appears that a portion of the adjacent City Park drains through this site, a Brow ditch type "F" inlet and an easement/public storm drain should be shown. The approved grading plan for this site also shows a D-25 curb outlet on Ambrosia Lane not identified on this plan MPA 177(W)/LCPA 97-1WT 97-17/PUD 97-15/CDP 97-46: BRINDISI COMPLETENESS & ISSUES REVIEW June 16, 1998 Page 3 Attached is a red-lined check print of the proposed project for the applicants use in making the requested revisions. This check print must be returned along with the first review, to facilitate continued staff review. If you or the applicant have any questions, please contact Clyde Wickham at 438-1161, extension 4353. Sincerely, Adrienne Landers Principal Planner AL:mh Clyde Wickham Bob Wojcik Bobbie Hoder Data Entry File Copy itv of Carlsbad Planning Department May 26, 1998 Richmond O'Neill Breh.ni Communities Suite 220 2835 Camino del Rio South San Diego, CA 92108 • ?*$ SUBJECT: MPA 177(W)/LCPA 97-10/CT97-17/PUD 97-15/CDP 97-26 - BRINDISI Enclosed please find remaining Planning issues related to the above listed project. After staff review of the proposed project, there were several issues that had not been addressed completely or revisions caused new issues to surface. Please respond as soon as possible so a Planning Commission hearing date can be scheduled. 1. Provide patio and trellis details as previously requested. These should be included as provided in the attached sample and modified as necessary for this particular project. The Aviara Master Plan does not provide the necessary level detail. The importance of doing the patio/trellis plan is to provide clarity at the front counter when the 90 new property owners come in with 90 different patio/trellis plans. Re/v-ii*-^ 2. Square footage figures shown on the tentative map are not consistent with the square footage amounts shown on the floor plans. C«o^»O^^-^-*- 3. The sound wall located at the southeast corner along Cassia Road scales off to 4' from the structure rather than 6' as indicated in the letter of May 15, 1998. It is possible to shift all of the units on the west side a few feet north which would provide a better living environment for the most southerly unit while still meeting all requirements. U-»i»jJ <>>-»•&*- 4. The minimum distance from garage to front property line is 20'. Some of the units do not provide this dimension—including several along Poinsettia and one at the northeast corner. 0^ 5. It appears that the required 15 x 15' required rear yard now intrudes into the northern slope. Retaining wall height should maintain a maximum height of 3'. 4'J/fc^U^vM ^A^JU^-t^^fe CS> difc. J-<*\ /5#S\fcjlsv*(J vl J a I ^ 0 \J • i6. Please provide a copy of the Master Plan text you propose to revise, striking through the deleted language and inserting proposed language as bolded and underlined. 1 am beginning to start the staff report; however, 1 cannot schedule a Planning Commission hearing dale until these few remaining Planning issues and any Engineering issues are resolved. 2O75 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92OO9-1576 - (76O) 438-1161 • FAX (76O) 438-O894 t MPA 177(W)/LCPA 97-jJpT 97-17/PUD 97-15/CDP 97-26 - MAY 26, 1998 W PAGE 2 The Planning Department also must have Engineering conditions prior to scheduling. Clyde Wickham may be contacted at 438-1 161, extension 4353 for remaining Engineering issues. Sincerely, ADRIENNE LANDERS Principal Planner AL:mh c: Clyde Wickham SAMPLE TRELLIS/PATIO COVER DESIGN GUIDELINES The following are Design Guidelines/Standards for trellis and patio covers within (name of project) . The purpose of the Design Guidelines is to permit the construction of trellis and patio covers that are aesthetically pleasing and unobtrusive. The Design Guidelines are accompanied by a Trellis/Patio Cover exhibit that identifies which units may have a trellis/patio cover, and the limits of the area of coverage for trellis and patio covers on a unit by unit basis. BASIC REQUIREMENTS: 1. All trellis and patio covers shall comply with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. 2. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for a trellis or patio cover, proof should be shown that the trellis/patio cover has been approved by the Homeowners' Association. Approval by the Homeowners' Association is discretionary as outlined in the CC&Rs (HOA letter and/or HOA stamp on plans). 3. A trellis/patio cover must be of color and design that is compatible with the dwelling unit. 4. Roofing materials for a patio cover must be the same or near the same style and color as the dwelling unit. 5. A trellis/patio cover must maintain all setback requirements as specified in the (name applicable discretionary action) Planned Development Ordinance or the Trellis/Patio Cover Design Guidelines, which ever is most restrictive. 6. Trellis/patio covers are permitted only on the units specifically identified as allowing for trellis/patio covers per the trellis/patio cover exhibit. 7. Trellis/patio covers located on lots adjacent to permanent open space must be constructed of materials approved by the Fire Department. SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: 1. A trellis/patio cover which meets the definition of "building" per Section 21.04.060 (has a roof and enclosed on all sides) must maintain a minimum distance of 10 feet from any adjoining dwelling unit or other trellis/patio cover post. A maximum of 2 feet overhang is allowed past the post. 2. A trellis/patio cover must maintain a minimum of 5 feet from a fence, sound wall or community wall. 3. A trellis/patio cover must maintain a minimum of 10 feet from the back of any sidewalk or private driveway. 4. No trellis/patio cover post or overhang may be located outside the identified coverage area. 5. A trellis/patio cover cannot be greater in height than 12 feet. 6. A trellis/patio cover cannot be greater in depth than 10 feet. 7. A trellis/patio cover cannot be greater than 16 feet in length, as measured from outside of post to outside of post. A maximum of 2 feet overhang is allowed past the post, (see trellis/patio cover detail). 8. A maximum length of 20 feet of trellis/patio cover is permitted on the same side of the dwelling unit. G:\LIBRARY\PLANNING\WORD\Trellis-Patio Guidelines.doc Revised 5/21/98 0 B1EHM COMMUNITIES May 15, 1998 Adrianne Landers CITY OF CARLSBAD Planning Department 2075 Las Palmas Dr. Carlsbad, CA 92009 RE: MPA 177(W) / LCPA 97 -17/ PUD 97-15 / CDP 97-46 The Brehm Companies Aviara Planning Area 19 Dear Adrianne: Enclosed with this letter are the revised plans and documents that respond to the items/issues of concern listed in your March 16, 1998. The intent of this cover letter is to provide specific responses to the comments identified in your letter of March 16, 1998. The following numbered response items reference the numbers identified in the letter. ISSUES OF CONCERN Planning: 1 . The sound wall along Poinsettia Lane near Cassia Road is located at the top of slope. The face of the sound wall is located a min. of 6.0 feet from the face of the building. By shifting the model site near the entrance, the landscape retaining wall at the bottom of the slope near Cassia was significantly reduced. (See POP - Sheet 2 and TM - Sheet 2) 2. As discussed in our meeting of April 22, 1998 the only second floor balconies are located at the front of the building. Only the Plan one has a second floor balconies therefore sound at these balconies is not an issue. See Architectural Plans and elevations The parking area at the northeast corner of the site has been redesigned. The parking area in the northwest corner has been eliminated. All parking areas are dimensioned on Sheet 2 of the POP. The turning radius for typical courtyards has been added to the Landscape plans. See sheet L-3b. 5. A total of 25 guest-parking spaces are provided per City Standards. This was confirmed with Dee Landers at the April 22, 1998 meeting. See sheet 1 of the POP ©^ The Tentative Map and Planned Development Plan now show the required items. Tentative Map number has been Changed to C"Mgj|^i|^o&Tentative Map ara*-*»— •• -—• «. Planned Development Plan MAY 1 5 1998 HAY 1 ? CITY OF CARLSBADCITY OF CARi * 40 PLANNING DEPT. PLANNING vr The shaded areas shown on the Planned Development Plan are the 15' X 15' recreation areas not Patio Structures. See Planned Development Plan sheet 1 typical for description and sheet 2 of 2 for all locations. 8. One monument sign is proposed at the entrance of Planning Area 19 per the landscape architect plans. The location of the monument is shown on page two of both the Tentative Map and the Planned Development Plan. The monument is located on sheet L-1 of the Concept Landscape Plans. 9. Distances from the garage face to the front property line are shown on Sheet 2 of the POP and Sheet 2 of the TM. 10. The first floor garage door to garage door dimension is 36'6". The second floor face of building to face of building dimension varies from 28'6" to 34' 6". The first floor dimensions are shown on Sheet 2 of the POP and the TM. 11. Bench/fountain locations are shown on the standard detail on the POP cover sheet. All locations are shown on the landscape architect plans by Estrada. See Sheet L-3 12. Recreation area is shown on the Landscape Plans. See page L-2 13. Material/Color boards are enclosed with the submittal. ENGINEERING 1. The proposed Site Development Plan for Planning Area 19 will not include any offsite grading. The proposed development will join existing grades at the North property line per the Approved Grading Plans (CT 92-3, Drawing No. 341-5A, and Sheet 10 of 25, as prepared by P& D Technologies.) The future park access road for the park site is shown on Sheet 2 of the POP and Sheet 2 of the TM. 2. All existing driveways are now shown on Sheet 2 of the POP TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION 1. Site distance lines are shown on Sheet 2 of the POP and Sheet 2 of the TM. The proposed monument, as shown on Sheet L-1 of the Landscaping Plans, is located at the North side of the entrance to Planning Area 19. 2. The path of access for this project is Ambrosia Lane. This was discussed with Clyde Wickham at the April 22, 1998 meeting. See Note 16 on the TM and POP. 3. The model site has been revised. The revised model site was coordinated with Clyde Whickham at the City of Carlsbad. SEWER 1. Water and sewer laterals are shown on the "typical lot drainage detail" on Sheet 1 of the POP. All water and sewer easements have been coordinated with Randy Klaahsen at CMWD. DRAINAGE 1 . Offsite drainage is collected in a brow ditch located at the North property line of Planning Area 19. Additional offsite drainage remains offsite and is direct South by means of a cross gutter located in Ambrosia Lane. The proposed storm sewer easement is shown on Sheet 2 of the POP and TM. 2. A revised drainage study is included with this submittal to validate the proposed storm sewer sizes. 3. A cross gutter was added to direct offsite flows South, per the approved Master Drainage Plan. This cross gutter is located at the intersection of Ambrosia Lane and "A" Street. 4. A storm sewer extension in Ambrosia Lane is not required. No drainage from Planning Area 19 is directed offsite to Ambrosia Lane. We anticipate that the plans and documents are now consistent with your expectations. Please let me know immediately if there is any additional information or clarification that you need in order to schedule this item for Planning Commission hearing. Sincerely, Richmond O'Neill Project Manager CC: Clyde Wickham Woody Brehm Paul Klukas City of Carlsbad Planning Department March 9, 1998 Larry Noreen Brehm Communities 2835 Camino Del Rio South Ste. 220 San Diego, CA 92108 SUBJECT: MPA 177(W)/LCPA 97-10/CT 97-17/PUD 97-15/CDP 97-46, BRINDISI Thank you for applying for Land Use Permits in the City of Carlsbad. The Planning Department has reviewed the applications listed above, as to their completeness for processing. COMPLETE AFTER RESUBMITTAL The items requested from you earlier to make your application complete have been received and reviewed by the Planning Department. It has been determined that the application is now complete for processing. Although the initial processing of your application may have already begun, the technical acceptance date is acknowledged by the date of this communication. Please note that although the application is now considered complete, there may be issues that could be discovered during project review and/or environmental review. Any issues should be resolved prior to scheduling the project for public hearing. In addition, the City may request, in the course of processing the application, that you clarify, amplify, correct, or otherwise, supplement the basic information required for the application. Please contact your staff planner, Adrienne Landers, at (760) 438-1161, extension 4451 or staff engineer, Clyde Wickham, at extension 4353, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincerely, MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director MJH:AL:mh c: Gary Wayne Team Leader Project Engineer Bobbie Hoder File Copy Data Entry Planning Aide 2075 Las Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad, CA 92OO9-1576 - (76O) 438-1161 - FAX (76O) 438-O894 City of Carlsbad Planning Department March 27, 1998 Richmond O'Neill Brehm Communities 2835 Camino del Rio South, Suite 220 San Diego, CA 92108 RE: {5HIMPISI - MP 177(W)/CT 97-17 Dear Mr. O'Neill: Enclosed please find redlined copies of landscaping comments. Please address these issues prior to your next submittal. Your next submittal need include only 4 copies of the revised sheets. Should staff find these acceptable, you may then submit the remaining sheets prior to Planning Commission. In addition to these comments, I would also like to request that you add the density per acre numbers to the tentative map. Please explain why the acreage amount for Planning Area 19 is different on the master plan and the tentative map~9.3 vs. 8.1 acres? — OAX*^ ^JUU&^b Also Parks and Recreation has indicated an unwillingness to permit grading on the parks site. Obviously, this then is a major issue that requires resolution as quickly as possible. Sincerely, ADRIENNE LANDERS Principal Planner Enclosure 2075 La Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 • (760) 438-1161 • FAX (76O) 438-O894 t City of Carlsbad Planning Department March 16, 1998 Larry Noreen Brehm Communities 2835 Camino del Rio South, Suite 220 San Diego, CA 92108 SUBJECT: MPA 177{W)/LCPA 97-10/CT 97-17/PUD 97-15/CDP 97-46 - BRINDISI Enclosed please find a list of issues of concern from the Planning and Engineering Departments. They were inadvertently left off the complete letter mailed to your office on March 6, 1998. Please feel free to call me at 438-1161, extension 4451, if you have any questions regarding the planning items or Clyde Wickham, at extension 4353, if you have any engineering questions. Sincerely, ADRIENNE LANDERS Principle Planner AL:mh Attachment c: Gary Wayne Clyde Wickham Bobbie Hoder File Copy Data Entry Planning Aide 2O75 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92OO9-1576 • (76O) 438-1161 • FAX (760) 438-O894 ISSUES OF CONCERN 1 . The wall along Poinsettia Lane near Cassia Road should follow the top of slope, rather than extending beyond the slope to increase buildable area. The last unit of the structure at this location should be deleted, the wall relocated, and the height of the wall reduced to a maximum of 6 feet. , 2. Floor plans do not indicate second floor balconies. Are any planned because it does'K'c^ ' not appear that the noise analysis will permit them without some type of noise (y\ barrier. ' 3. Redesign the parking spaces at northeast corner to provide a 24' backup, space... .., , ° . .. . CL*Asv£r&. tcrtLo- ^*»« •o-cZjJ-c' OiModify to the same design as northwest corner. <? (&\j r-3 s/<_ 4. Provide a turning radius for a typical courtyard indicating that adequate backup can be provided . «*•*-*• "** f^A*^<j-ti-*tt^.H- fjp-*^ 5. Modify tentative map to indicate that 29 guest parking spaces are both required and provided. Only 25 guest parking spaces are indicated, please provide 4 more spaces. Guest parking spaces located along the interior street must be 24' feet in length unless located next to a driveway apron. 0 6. Not all the submitted tentative maps include guest parking spaces, patio slabs, etc. Please indicate that these are different pages as they are both currently labeled as Sheet 2 of 2. On the sheet indicating the patio slabs, etc., please modify the tentative map number to CT 97-17 instead of 97-15. 7. Patio structures along Poinsettia and Ambrosia — not 15' from top of slope c5 (£— 8. Indicate the location and design of proposed monument signs. 9. Provide distances from garages to front property lines. oz*~- 10. Provide a typical indicating: width of driveways from 1st floor to 1st floor and f rom second floor living space to second floor living space; turning radius; and tree well location. & 11. Indicate where fountains or benches will be located. Provide additional benches and/or features in other common areas to function as gathering areas. 1 2. Provide larger scale detail of recreation area, trellises at courtyards and trellises between buildings.*^ ^-orsA— ^-t— 13. Provide materials and color boards. __ __ jtj /WvA-J-*- C^Xs-a fp^&A ,e^V£A. dfotAJL* ^xyrjuOL^^X <Lt3tix>Xo Engineering: Staff has conducted a review of the project for engineering issues of concern. Engineering issues which need to be resolved or adequately addressed prior to staff making a determination on the proposed project are as follows: 1 . The previously approved grading plan shows an interim cul de sac slope and temporary access road, show proposed disposition of this plan. Check with Mark Steyart (434- 2824 x 2855) regarding grading of Park property. The park access, and the proposed grading ("limits of grading") on the future park have not been resolved. 2. On our last review we were referring to the park access and any access on Ambrosia Ln. (across from street "A"). Please show any existing driveways which are located within 300' ef the proposed project. Check with Mark Steyart for proposed park access. Traffic and Circulation'. 1 . The Aviara Master Plan identified a monument sign that, if proposed, should be shown and pulled back, clear of sight distance or clear areas. Indicate the sight lines on the tentative map, the site plan and the landscape plan. The landscape plans have 2 areas of concern. The intersection of Poinsettia Ln. and Ambrosia Ln., and at the corner return at the clubhouse/cabana should be corrected to correspond to the corner sight distance issue. 2. Please indicate the path of access for this project. 3. The proposed access to end units (check phase 3 (OK) vs the Model end (NG) will need a hammerhead turn-around. The only place this is an issue is at the model location. Q I Sewer: 1 . Please indicate sewer laterals from the proposed buildings to public sewer facilities. Show or note that sewer clean outs and laterals are not located in driveways. Show water laterals and meter locations similar to sewer services with the same restrictions. Drainage: 1 . Please show the terminus of the off-site drainage at the north end of the site. Indicate the proposed public easement that follows the storm drain through this subdivision. PCA^T A^-v. JJW*- ptM-K, K <£^TUML!^- .Y\o p*-J^t/^- <^T\32A, TJvu 2. Submit a drainage study to validate capacity in the existing system considering the proposed project and allowing for upstream development. 3. The proposed drainage pattern at the entrance to this project is unclear. Add spot elevations or contours as required. Cross gutters should be provided at the intersection of Ambrosia Lane with "A" Street. The public street drainage through this project was not the designed pattern specified in the Aviara Master Phase III Hydrology study. Please reconsider and if necessary, extend storm drain. 4. Again, the extension of a storm drain in Ambrosia may be required to handle the proposed design. Attached is a red-lined check print of the proposed project for the applicants use in making the requested revisions. This check print must be returned along with the first review, to facilitate continued staff review. City of Carlsbad Planning Department March 16, 1998 Larry Noreen Brehm Communities 2835 Camino del Rio South, Suite 220 San Diego, CA 92108 SUBJECT: MPA 177(W)/LCPA 97-10/CT 97-17/PUD 97-15/CDP 97-46 - BRINDISJ Enclosed please find a list of issues of concern from the Planning and Engineering Departments. They were inadvertently left off the complete letter mailed to your office on March 6, 1998. Please feel free to call me at 438-1161, extension 4451, if you have any questions regarding the planning items or Clyde Wickham, at extension 4353, if you have any engineering questions. Sincerely, ADRIENNE LANDERS Principle Planner AL:mh Attachment c: Gary Wayne Clyde Wickham Bobbie Hoder File Copy Data Entry Planning Aide 2075 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 • (76O) 438-1161 • FAX (760) 438-O894 ISSUES OF CONCERN Planning: The wall along Poinsettia Lane near Cassia Road should follow the top of slope, rather than extending beyond the slope to increase buildable area. The last unit of the structure at this location should be deleted; the wall relocated, and the height of the wall reduced to a maximum of 6 feet. Floor plans do not indicate second floor balconies. Are any planned because it does not appear that the noise analysis will permit them without some type of noise barrier. 3ts Redesign the parking spaces at northeast corner to provide a 24' backup space. Modify to the same design as northwest corner. Provide a turning radius for a typical courtyard indicating that adequate backup can be provided. Modify tentative map to indicate that 29 guest parking spaces are both required and provided. Only 25 guest parking spaces are indicated, please provide 4 more spaces. Guest parking spaces located along the interior street must be 24' feet in length unless located next to a driveway apron. 6. Not all the submitted tentative maps include guest parking spaces, patio slabs, etc. Please indicate that these are different pages as they are both currently labeled as Sheet 2 of 2. On the sheet indicating the patio slabs, etc., please modify the tentative map number to CT 97-17 instead of 97-15. Patio structures along Poinsettia and Ambrosia — not 15' from top of slope 8. Indicate the location and design of proposed monument signs. Provide distances from garages to front property lines. Provide a typical indicating: width of driveways from 1st floor to 1st floor and from second floor living space to second floor living space; turning radius; and tree well location. 1 1 . Indicate where fountains or benches will be located. Provide additional benches and/or features in other common areas to function as gathering areas. 1£2<" Provide larger scale detail of recreation area, trellises at courtyards and trellises between buildings. 13. Provide materials and color boards. Engineering: Staff has conducted a review of the project for engineering issues of concern. Engineering issues which need to be resolved or adequately addressed prior to staff making a determination on the proposed project are as follows: 1. The previously approved grading plan shows an interim cul de sac slope and temporary access road, show proposed disposition of this plan. Check with Mark Steyart (434- 2824 x 2855) regarding grading of Park property. The park access, and the proposed grading ("limits of grading") on the future park have not been resolved. 2. On our last review we were referring to the park access and any access on Ambrosia Ln. (across from street "A"). Please show any existing driveways which are located within 300' of the proposed project. Check with Mark Steyart for proposed park access. Traffic and Circulation: 1. The Aviara Master Plan identified a monument sign that, if proposed, should be shown and pulled back, clear of sight distance or clear areas. Indicate the sight lines on the tentative map, the site plan and the landscape plan. The landscape plans have 2 areas of concern. The intersection of Poinsettia Ln. and Ambrosia Ln., and at the corner return at the clubhouse/cabana should be corrected to correspond to the corner sight distance issue. 2. Please indicate the path of access for this project. 3. The proposed access to end units (check phase 3 (OK) vs the Model end (NG) will need a hammerhead turn-around. The only place this is an issue is at the model location. Sewer. 1. Please indicate sewer laterals from the proposed buildings to public sewer facilities. Show or note that sewer clean outs and laterals are not located in driveways. Show water laterals and meter locations similar to sewer services with the same restrictions. Drainage: 1. Please show the terminus of the off-site drainage at the north end of the site. Indicate the proposed public easement that follows the storm drain through this subdivision. 2. Submit a drainage study to validate capacity in the existing system considering the proposed project and allowing for upstream development. 3. The proposed drainage pattern at the entrance to this project is unclear. Add spot elevations or contours as required. Cross gutters should be provided at the intersection of Ambrosia Lane with "A" Street. The public street drainage through this project was not the designed pattern specified in the Aviara Master Phase III Hydrology study. Please reconsider and if necessary, extend storm drain. 4. Again, the extension of a storm drain in Ambrosia may be required to handle the proposed design. Attached is a red-lined check print of the proposed project for the applicants use in making the requested revisions. This check print must be returned along with the first review, to facilitate continued staff review. City of Carlsbad Planning Department September 15, 1997 Larry Noreen Brehm Communities Suite 220 2835 Camino del Rio South San Diego CA 92108 SUBJECT: ffi!E37-54 - AVIARA PLANNING AREA 19 APN: 215-080-24, 215-040-19,-24,-25 A preliminary review of your project was conducted on August 28, 1997. Listed below are the issues raised by staff. Please note that the purpose of a preliminary review is to provide you with direction and comments on the overall concept of your project. The preliminary review does not represent an in-depth analysis of your project. Additional issues of concern may be raised after your application is submitted and processed for a more specific and detailed review. Planning: 1. The proposed condominium project would require a Tentative Tract Map, Planned Unit Development Permit and Coastal Development Permit. Since the project involves more that 50 units, the City Council would be the final decision maker. Should revisions to the Aviara Master Plan be requested, then a Master Plan Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment would also be necessary. These legislative amendments can be processed concurrently with the map and development permits, however the California Coastal Commission would be final decision maker on the Local Coastal Program Amendment. 2. The site is designated for multifamily uses at a maximum density of 19.8 units per acre. The proposed attached multifamily product with a density of approximately 9 units per acre meets this use allocation. Without architectural elevations or floor plans, no comments can be made about building height and other architectural criteria. 3. Staff can not respond to the proposal to reduce the Poinsettia Lane setback from 50 feet to 40 feet, because additional information is needed. This development will be required to conduct a noise study due to its proximity to Poinsettia Lane and the existing setback will likely be required to accommodate adequate noise 2O75 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92OO9-1576 - (619) 438-1161 • FAX (619) 438-O894 PRE 97-54 - AVIARA SEPTEMBER 15, 1997 PAGE 2 TO\NNINGAREA19 adequate noise mitigation. Without the noise impact information, staff is unwilling to adjust the Poinsettia Lane setback. Staff can support the proposed reduction in master plan boundary setback along the eastern edge of Planning Area 19 toill^feet from top of slope, with a minimum property line setback of 25 feet, ^fftis allows each rear yard to achieve the necessary 15 foot by 15 foot minimum dimension while providing enough setback from the neighboring units in the Poinsettia Hill development. Each unit must provide a minimum of 200 square feet of recreation area. If the unit has a rear yard with minimum dimensions 15 feet by 15 feet or a balcony with minimum dimensions 10 feet by 10 feet, then a credit of 100 square feet can be applied to the total common active recreation area. Please indicate how many units meet this minimum yard or balcony dimension and the resulting required common active recreation area requirements. The proposed development would require several revisions to the existing master plan development standards and design criteria. Approval of these amendments is based heavily on the type of development that they allow. Without architectural elevations, it is difficult to assess the potential impacts and benefits of these development standards amendments. In order to provide some guidance, the following site design comments are offered. The proposed reduction in front yard setbacks along the main circulation pattern would only be considered for single story elements. No second story balconies or living space should occupy the reduced setback area. In addition, the buildings should be rotated or skewed to reduce the amount of mass proximate to the street frontage (this comment has been made on several previous occasions). The reduced courtyard width, from 40 feet to 35 feet, may also be supported however, as with the above comments, site design will be very important. The proposed "cookie-cutter" site layout is unacceptable to staff. Also included in the site design considerations would be the accessibility of guest parking. The Planned Development Ordinance requires that guest parking be dispersed along any private drive with a minimum five foot front yard setback. Please also consult the Engineering and Fire Departments about minimum circulation requirements. Please note that a minimum 10 foot street side yard setback is required for all buildings, especially those with side yards fronting on the main entry drive (see the unit on the south side of the entryway). PD\rPRE 97-54 - AVIARA PLANNING AREA 19 SEPTEMBER 15, 1997 PAGE 3 7. The proposed retaining wall may cause wall height issues. The typical maximum wall height is six feet, including any combination of retaining and privacy walls. Please consider this maximum in the project's wall and fence plan. 8. Since Planning Area 19 is adjacent to a future public park, adequate disclosure of the potential light and noise impact is necessary. Should the park not be developed before Planning Area 19, staff will require additional disclosure to potential homebuyers. Increased rear yards should be incorporated into the site design along the northern boundary of the planning area to allow private landscaping improvements for buffering of the park. 9. No landscaping plans were submitted therefore no comments regarding such can be made. Please consult the City's Landscape Manual for planting, irrigation and plan preparation requirements. 10. An additional access to the property may be required. Please consult the Fire Department regarding their secondary access requirements for gated residential subdivisions. Engineering: 1. Dedication of Cassia Road per Aviara Phase III - Unit 1 needs to be completed. 2. Alignment (line and grade) of Poinsettia Lane to the west needs to be verified. 3. Improvements of Ambrosia Lane, Poinsettia Lane and Cassia Road need to be completed. 4. Grading needs to be coordinated with the Parks Department (Mark Steyaert). 5. Easements will be required for any off-site grading. 6. Slope at the east side of the project drains to the adjacent property. Slope needs to comply with City of Carlsbad Engineering Standards. 7. A minimum of one percent (1%) fall is recommended for all paving to avoid standing water. Please show drainage patterns and where the water is discharged. 8. No parking will be allowed directly across from the project entrance. 9. Please show typical dimensions of auto courts (25 feet minimum circulation width). PRE 97-54 - AVIARA pRslNING AREA 19 SEPTEMBER 15, 1997 PAGE 4 10. Distance between driveway entrances to auto courts should be a minimum of 24 feet to allow for on street parking. 11. Please provide a five (5) foot buffer at all garage doors and parking stalls. 12. Please eliminate or redesign the landscaped islands at the east side of the driveway, they create traffic confusion and possible conflicts. 13. Please show the 25 foot by 25 foot sight distance corridors at the entrance and all corners. Please contact Mike Grim at (760) 438-1161, extension 4499 if you have any questions. Sincere GARYE/WAYNE ' Assistant Planning Director GEW:MG:kr c: Michael J. Holzmiller Brian Hunter Frank Jimeno Mike Smith Bill Plummer Bobbie Hoder File Copy Data Entry City of Carlsbad Planning Department March 9, 1998 Larry Noreen Brehm Communities 2835 Camino Del Rio South Ste. 220 San Diego, CA 92108 SUBJECT: MPA 1 77(W)/LCPA 97-10/CT 97-17/PUD 97-1 5/CDP 97-46, BRINDISI Thank you for applying for Land Use Permits in the City of Carlsbad. The Planning Department has reviewed the applications listed above, as to their completeness for processing. COMPLETE AFTER RESUBMITTAL The items requested from you earlier to make your application complete have been received and reviewed by the Planning Department. It has been determined that the application is now complete for processing. Although the initial processing of your application may have already begun, the technical acceptance date is acknowledged by the date of this communication. Please note that although the application is now considered complete, there may be issues that could be discovered during project review and/or environmental review. Any issues should be resolved prior to scheduling the project for public hearing. In addition, the City may request, in the course of processing the application, that you clarify, amplify, correct, or otherwise, supplement the basic information required for the application. Please contact your staff planner, Adrienne Landers, at (760) 438-1161, extension 4451 or staff engineer, Clyde Wickham, at extension 4353, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincerely, MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director MJH:AL:mh c: Gary Wayne Team Leader Project Engineer Bobbie Hoder File Copy Data Entry Planning Aide 2075 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 • (76O) 438-1161 • FAX (760) 438-O894 * FILE COPY City of Carlsbad Planning Department Augusts, 1999 Klaus Mendenhall The Brehm Company 5770 Oberlin Drive San Diego CA 92121 RE: CT97-17-BRINDISI/CT97-20-CRISTALLA Dear Klaus: Please find enclosed two Notices of Restriction to be completed for the Brindisi and Cristalla projects. Please have the documents signed following the instructions on the signature page. Once completed, please return the documents to me, and I will forward them on for recordation. If you have any questions regarding the above, please call me at 438-1161, extension 4447. Sincerely, VAN LYNCH Associate Planner VL:mh Enclosure c: Dee Landers Mike Grim File 2075 La Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92OO9-1576 • (760) 438-1161 • FAX (76O) 438-O894 City of Carlsbad Recreation Department DEVELOPING TOMORROW'S LEADERS July 29, 1999 Klaus Mendenhall BREHM COMPANIES 5770 Oberlin Drive San Diego, CA 92121-1723 BUILDING COMMUNITY PRIDE STRENGTHENING FAMILIES IMPROVING QUALITY OF LIFE LETTER OF PERMISSION TO GRADE: BRIIMDISI PROJECT/ZONE 19 PARK Dear Mr. Mendenhall, The Recreation Department has reviewed the Carlsbad Tract Map No. 97-17 and Grading Plans (2nd Plan Check, Drawing No. 378-7A). We hereby give permission to grade on the Zone 19 Park Site in conformance with the above mentioned plans and all other conditions set forth previously by the City of Carlsbad. In addition, the disclosure statement concerning the acknowledgment of home buyers that there will be a future City park immediately to the north of them, will be added to the Sales Disclosures for the Brindisi Project (refer letter from Brehm Companies, 8/3/99). Mark Steyaert Park Development Coordinator Recreation Director (w/attached letter) Associate Engineer, Clyde Wickham (w/attached letter) Principal Planner, Dee Landers (w/attached letter) 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad CA 92008-1989 (760)434-2824 FAX (760) 434-7185 fiiv .1:'.;-jinn FAXf.l'l-W .MIM THE B^EHM* COMPANIES Augusts, 1999 Mark Steyaert City of Carlsbad Park and Recreation 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 Re: Letter Permission to Grade Project No. CT 97-17 Drawing No. 378-7A Dear Mr. Steyaert: Per your request, this letter is to provide you with written assurance that the Brehm Companies will include the following disclosure in their project Sales Disclosures to their future homebuyers: "The Property immediately to the north of the project is planned for a future park site consisting of 24 acres which will contain lighted ball and soccer fields and passive uses consistent with other parks within the City of Carlsbad. On occasion this could cause traffic delays, lightning and noise concerns. In the event this property is sold or transferred to any successor in interest, this disclosure will apply to any and all future parities. Should you desire any change in this disclosure, please don't hesitate to contact me at (858) 404-9783. ;Hogan President/COO 2835 ^A SAN DIEGO CAMINO DEL RIO SOUT^^f CALIFORNIA 92108-3882 SUITE 220 619293-7090 FAX 619 293-3056 THE B^EHM^COMPANIES November 20, 1998 Ms. Adrienne Landers CITY OF CARLSBAD Planning Department 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 RE: Early Grading and Model Construction for Brindisi (PA 19) Dear Adrienne: Per our previous meetings and conversations, The Brehm Companies is requesting early grading and model construction for Brindisi (PA 19), based on early plan submittals and bond agreements. A demolition bond is proposed to be posted by The Brehm Companies, which will allow the models to be built in accordance with the approved tentative map before the final map approval. Prior to planning commission on December 16, 1998, The Brehm Companies, will submit grading and improvement plans for City review. These plans will fulfill all building and Fire Department requirements, including water and sewer services. Dee, please let me know what our opportunities may be in these areas. Thank you. Very truly yours, THE BREHM COMPANIES Paula Lombardi Director of Development PL:aa cc: Clyde Wickham - City of Carlsbad, Engineering Brian Stup - PDC 2835 CAMINO DEL RIO S SUITE 220 SAN DIEGO CALIFORNIA 92108-3882 619 293-7090 FAX 619 293-3056 ANIES October 29, 1998 Ms. Adrienne Landers City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 RE: MPA 177 (W) LCPA 97-10 / CT 97-17 / CU 98-10 / CDP 97-66 Brindisi - PA19 Dear Ms. Landers: Our current estimate of export, 7600 cubic yards, will be hauled off the jobsite outside the boundary of the City of Carlsbad. Should you have any further questions or concerns, please give me a call. Very truly yours, THE BREHM COMPANIES Paula Lombardi Director of Development PL:aa cc: Brian Stup, PDC 2835 ^BN DIEGO CAMINO DEL RIO SOUTH ^P\LIFORNIA 92108-3882 SUITE 220 619293-7090 FAX 619 293-3056 THE B^EHM^COMPANIES Jan 27, 1998 Adrianne Landers CITY OF CARLSBAD Planning Department 2075 Las Palmas Dr. Carlsbad, CA 92009 RE: MPA 177(W) / LCPA 97-10 / CT 97-17 / PUD 97-15 / CDP 97-46 PLANNING DEPT* The Brehm Companies Aviara Planning Area 19 Dear Adrianne: Enclosed with this letter are revised plans and documents in satisfaction of the item/issue comments listed in the letter from Michael Holzmiller dated Nov. 20, 1997. The intent of this cover letter is to provide specific responses to the comments identified in the Holzmiller letter, the following numbered response items reference the numbers identified in the letter. ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION Planning: The cover sheet of the tentative map has been revised to include the project name and application numbers. /2. The cover sheet of the tentative map has been revised to include the assessor's parcel number. <T The percentage of landscaping was added to the TM and the PDP general notes. Twenty two percent of the site will be landscaped per the Aviara III PA 19 Landscape Concept Plan, Sheet L-1 prepared by Estrada Land Planning on September 26, 1997. ^A. ^^ Rear patio pads for Unit Types 2 and 3 (a5' x 15') were added to the PDP, Sheet 2 of 2. All 60 units exceed the minimum rear yard dimensions of 15' x 15'. Therefore, a credit of (60 units)(100 SF credit)= 6,000 SF credit may be applied to the total common active recreational area. In addition, all 30 Type I units have a minimum balcony of 10' X 10'. Therefore, a credit of (30 units)(100 SF credit) = 3,000 SF credit may be applied to the total common active recreational area. A summary of the total recreation requirement is as follows: REQUIRED PROVIDED PROVIDED TOTAL PRIVATE (15X15) COMMON 90 x 200 SF = 18,000 SF 60 X 225 = 13,500 SF 79,000 SF 92,500 SF Wall heights and locations were added to the TM (Sheet 2 of 2). The Building Elevation Plans have been revised to include full dimensioned information. In addition, the elevation design has been modified in accordance with your discussions with Stark Architects subsequent to the Holzmiller letter. A constraints map does not apply to this project since the project involves a site previously fully disturbed by authorized and permitted grading, in accordance with Section 21.95.090(b)(1). A note was added to the TM and POP (Note 15). A legal description on the application form is included with this resubmittal. 9-.-""'" The PFF agreement has been corrected to reflect the correct number of units (90). ^KJ Two copies of the Circulation Impact Analysis, dated September 26, 1997 are included in this resubmittial. This item was submitted with the original submittal. -t*T Two copies of the Noise analysis, dated Oct. 10, 1997 are included in this resubmittal. The Noise analysis was submitted with the original submittal package. A signed "Notice of Time Limits on Discretionary Applications" form will be provided with this submittal. This form was signed at the counter on the date of the original submittal. ISSUES OF CONCERN Planning: As mentioned, a Noise Analysis has been included with this resubmittal package. This Analysis concludes that a maximum 6'6" high wall, berm, or combination wall/berm barrier must be provided in order to meet the City exterior noise policy standard. In compliance with the results of this analysis is our proposal to install a 6-foot wall on top of a 6-inch berm. This berm is so minimal that it will not be visible from Poinsettia Lane, and only slightly visible from the interior rear yards of the units. /Z As mentioned, the 15' X 15' private recreation areas are demonstrated on the PD Plans. J5. The units have been redesigned, as discussed in your meetings with Stark Architects and Alice Cummings of Brehm. Engineering (Nov. 18. 1997 Memo): 1. The legal descriptions are now consistent with the accurate description on the tentative map, site develpment plan and the application. 2. A proposed 42-inch joint utility easement is shown on the Tentative Map. 3. The existing approved grading plan for Aviara Phase III has been shown as a screened base. This existing base also shows how contours tie into existing offsite conditions. 4. There are no existing driveway locations within 300 feet of the proposed project site. Traffic and Circulation 1 Corner sight lines were added to the POP and the TM. The monument sign detail is shown on the landscape plans. 2. Current construction schedules for the Aviara III Planning Area indicate that Ambrosia Lane will serve the proposed project site. 3. The "knuckle" design has been revised as required and coordinated with the City of Carlsbad and the Carlsbad Fire Department. 4. Access for a separate cluster unit and side-loaded unit is a "site concept issue". 5. The concrete sidewalk is shown on "B" Street. A concrete sidewalk is also shown with a hatch pattern around "C", "D", and "E" Streets. Entrance ramps are shown on the landscape plan. Sewer Exact locations for utility services are not known at this time. Locations will be verified with plumbing plans. Drainage 1 . Drainage patterns and grading are shown at the North end of the site. Flow arrows and elevations have been added to show the offsite conditions. 2. A drainage study was submitted with the first submittal (1 0 sets were submitted, if additional copies are needed please let me know). Flow areows and the "drainage concept" at the North end of the site are shown on the TM and POP. 3. A cross gutter at the entrance is not required, Drainage from the west (cul-de-sac) will flow through the proposed site and be removed from the site via a storm drain system. 4. Based on hydraulic calculations and a preliminary drainage study, a storm drain extension in Ambrosia Lane is not required. We anticipate that the plans and documents are now consistent with your expectation. Please let me know immediately if there is any additional information or clearification you need in order to schedule this item for Planning Commission hearing. It is our desire to achieve a March hearing. Sincerely, Richmond O'Neill Project Manager cc: Clyde Wickham Woody Brehm D. L. Clemens Paul Klukas