HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 98-14; Thompson/Tabata; Tentative Map (CT) (36)MEMORANDUM
TO: Senior Planner-MIKE GRIM October 25, 1999
From: Associate Engineer — Land Use Review
CT 98-14, CDP 98-68, HDP 98-15, PD 98-05, SDP 99-06 : POINSETTIA PROPERTIES
Engineering Department staff has completed another review of the above-referenced project for
resolution of issues. The application and plans submitted for this proposed project are
considered complete with issues remaining to be resolved prior to approval. I have contacted
the Engineer of work directly to comment and revise the proposed subdivision on the following
issues:
1. The proposed drainage system east of this subdivision, adjacent to and behind lots 8
& 9 will require additional storm drain and D41 energy dissipaters to mitigate
downstream erosion. Additional easements may be required as access and
maintenance to a public storm drain.
2. Feasible access to all adjacent undeveloped property must be shown for this project.
The Sacaria Parcel on the corner of Aviara Parkway and Poinsettia Lane could be
considered landlocked and undevelopable by virtue of the proposed design. Grading
is also proposed on this parcel as well as sewer and storm drain. Contact the owner
and provide a letter of permission or support for the proposed design.
3. Offsite grading must be shown and letters of support or permission submitted. The
remnant lots owned by Std. Pacific appear to be graded by this design yet not
included in the project or subdivision boundary. This issue must be resolved prior to
support of the proposed design.
4. The offsite sewer and storm drain west of Lonicera Street needs additional
clarification. Is the existing system in Briarwood drive public? Was the existing
system constructed to public standards and sized for the additional flow? Has
permission been obtained from the adjacent project to encroach or extend these
facilities and to acquire easements to this site?
5. The proposed sidewalk on one side for a portion of street "A" and also for street "E"
cannot be supported. Street "A" is a collector that serves as access to a significant
number of homes to the east. Pedestrian access must be provided on both sides of
the street. Street "E" does not qualify as a Hillside Street for the single loaded street
design and would not be consistent with the existing neighborhood.
6. The sight distance and the vertical profile exhibit (sheet 9) should reflect minimum
standards for street design. The design speed for local and cul de sac streets is 25
MPH. Any substandard design should be specifically requested as a variance. Staff
cannot support sight distance at intersections that is less than the minimum corner
sight distance standard.
If yoti dr the apftHcant have any questions, please either see or contact me at extension
/ 4353.n /
Associate Engineer - Land Use Review
c: Bob Wojcik, Principal Engineer, Land use Review Division