The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCT 98-21; Seaview; Tentative Map (CT)city of April 9, 1999 Mr. Joseph A Gallagher 5 142 Avenida Encinas Carlsbad, CA 92008 aLt SUBJECT: CT 98-21/SDP 98-P$lHDP 92-23 - SEAVIEW g-LOT SUBDIVISION The items requested from you earlier to make your tentative subdivision map, application no. CT 98-21/SDP 98-42/HDP 98-23 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, Barbara Kennedy, at (760) 438-l 161, extension 4325, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincerely, Planning Director MJH:BK:eh c: Gary Wayne Chris DeCerbo, Team Leader Clyde Wickham, Project Engineer Bobbie Hoder File Copy Data Entry Planning Aide 2075 La Palmas Dr. l Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 l (760) 438-l 161 - FAX (760) 438-0894 @ ISSUES OF CONCERN Planning: 1. The Planning Department concurs with the Engineering Department regarding utiiizing stepped pads for Lots 1,2, and 3. The Engineering Department feels that the rear of these lots could still be lowered an additional 5 feet. If this is possible, the residences for these lots could be designed so that they appear as a one-story structure from the street and the second level could step down the rear of the lot. Redesigning the lots in this fashion could benefit you in several ways in that: 1) it would result in less grading and significantly less import, 2) the grading plan would be more compatible with the existing terrain and the hillside development criteria, 3) the rear yards will increase in depth since the rear slope would be decreased, 4) the top of roof elevation would be lower which would enhance the views for your lots to the east, and 5) it would further reduce or eliminate the need for a retaining wall between Lot 1 and the residence to the south. I would welcome the opportunity to discuss this with you in more detail. 2. It appears that a contour line is missing between the 285 and 290 contours on page 2 of the Tentative Map. 3. Off-site easement “E” seems to be mislabeled as “2” on sheet 3 of the Constraints Map. 4. Lot 6 is considered to be a panhandle lot. As such, you will need to designate the front, side and rear setback areas on the Tentative Map. 5. The fencing plans show that Lot 4 has a 5 foot fence within the 20 foot front yard setback. Please revise the .pian so that the fencing does not exceed 42 inches within the front yard setback. Engineering: 1. Please see the attached memo and redline check print. Memorandum TO: Assistant Planner, Barbara Kennedy FROM: Associate Engineer, Clyde Wickham DATE: March 30,1999 RE: CT 98 - 211 SDP 98 - 24 / HDP 98 - 23: SEA VIEW Engineering Department staff has completed a 2”d review of the above-referenced 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: General: l The proposed subdivision will be responsible to obtain storm drain easement to serve this project. The proposed 10’ wide storm drain easement is sufficient for a private system. Please obtain letter of support or confirmation that the proposed plan is acceptable from the affected property owner. Gradina & Drainaae: l The proposed grading could be reduced if stepped pads were used for lots 1,2 & 3. Using steps would reduce the 15’ slope along the rear of this project and fit the existing terrain a lot better. The existing terrain is gentle sloped to the west. It contrast, the proposed slope will change the character and terrain considerably. l The proposed typical drainage detail on sheet 1 applies to lots I,2 & 3. The majority of the lots drain to the street, contrary to the typical. Also the 5’ minimum distance shown in detail, from house to flow line should be maintained. A detail of the typical drainage pattern at the narrow portion of side-yard should be shown. This issue applies to every lot as proposed. l Lot 7 as shown drains onto lot 6. 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 with the project revisions to facilitate continued staff review. . If you or the appii any questions, please contact me at extension 4353. M Associate Engineer Land Development Division I TYPE C OR D TERRACE DRAlN , f%lxj~*&7~olE 4) SEE TABLE BELOW FOR L VALUES TYPE B BROW DITCH NATURAL GROUND SURFACE -FINISHED GRADE -a\ fXl.SllNC CRDUND SURFACE ^. .-a I / I : -%NlSNfD GRACE- 5 TYPICAL CUT SLOPE REMOM. SOIL MANTLE TO COMPETENT MATERIAL -\ 27, NATURAL GROUND SURFACE FINISHED GRADE - rYPE C OR D TER IRAIN PER SDRS. (TYPICAL) (SEE ~0 SEE DE TAIL A BENCH TYPICAL FILL SLOPE CIKCAILK II suBDlHsloN BWNDRY NOTES H in feet 0 b less thon 10’ 1 2’ 3.5’ 10’ - 20’ over 20’ (H/5)’ 4’ 4+H/lO’(lO’ MAX) H/5’(lO’mox.) SETBACKS SLOPE ROUNDING DETAIL (DOES NOT APPLY TO SIDE SLOPES BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL UNITS) DR-AIL A 1). ALL FILL MUST BE COMPACTED TO A MINIMUM OF 90% OF THE MAXIMUM DENSITY WlTH THE EXCEPTION OF THE OUTER 8” OF THE SLOPE SURFACE WHICH MAY BE GRID ROLLED TO 859; DENSITY. 2). CUT SLOPES TO 40’ REOUIRE NO BENCH. CUT SLOPES OVER 100’ REOUIRE ONE MIN. 20’ BENCH MIDWAY ON SLOPE. 3). FILL SLOPES TO 30’ REOUIRE NO BENCH. FILL SLOPES OVER 100’ REOUIRE ONE MIN. 20’ BENCH MIDWAY ON SLOPE. 4). AS MODIFIED BY CITY OF CARLSBAD ENGINEERING STANDARDS. AEV. ) APPROVED DATE CITY OF CARLSBAD - GRADING OF SLOPES c Ar\n RF(31 JlRE6 SETBACKS I SUPPLEMENTAL STANl-IARfl Nr-I GS-14 i P i - A 4 I I L -I L E fn 1% MlN.(ROUCH GRADE) TOP OF FOOTING WAU SECTION A-A I I I PROI,;RTY LINE yoi i-i- v \/--I-l---~-II/---- 1 . . . *. . . .:. :. : ‘. :. : : .:. :., 5’ MIN.(SEE 911. 2) ‘. PROPERTY LINE J NOTES 1). DRAINAGE SHALL BE CONDUCTED TO STREET AS SURFACE FLOW WHENEVER POSSIBLE. 2). NON-EROSIVE DRAINAGE SURFACE REQUIRED WHERE FLOW IS COLLECTED. 3). FINISH GRADING SHALL PROVIDE A MINIMUM POSITIVE DRAINAGE OF 2% TO SWALE 5’ AWAY FROM THE BUILDING UNLESS SPECIFICALLY APPROVED OTHERWISE BY THE CITY ENGINEER.I(SEE SHEET 2) 4). DRIVEWAYS BETWEEN 14% AND 20% MUST RECEIVE SPECIAL APPROVAL OF THE CITY ENGINEER. SUBMIT ENGINEERED PROFILE’ AND LETTER OF REQUEST TO THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. SHEET 1 OF 2 REV. ( APPROVED IDATE CITY OF CARISBAD TYPICAL FINISHED I i LOT GRADING I SUPPLEMENTAL STANOARD NO. GS-15