The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCT 99-10; Buerger; Tentative Map (CT) (3)yl$..(.J Y-/7- 9 9 dity of &&bad I September 16, 1999 Sondra Harris Western Pacific Housing 2385 Camino Vida Roble, #IO7 Carlsbad, CA 92009 SUBJECT: ZC 99-05/LCPA 99-03/CT 99-lO/PUD 99-05/HDP 99-08/CDP 99-l 7 - BUERGERSUBDIVISION Dear Sondra: The Planning and Engineering Departments have completed their review of the August 11, 1999 submittal of the subject project. The following issues remain and must be resolved prior to receiving staff support and scheduling the project for public hearing: I. The proposed redesign of the subject PUD cannot be supported by staff. Although the parcel is constrained by the SDG&E easement, staff believes that a standard subdivision design can be achieved that would avoid the necessity for private streets and/or driveways. The proposed project attempts to create a panhandle design using private street widths, a design that has been recently rejected by the City Council in an infill area. Surrounding development within Zone 20 on lots with similar constraints have been approved as standard subdivisions Please redesign the project as a standard subdivision project or inform staff if you wish to take the project to hearing without staff support. If you choose to proceed with a standard subdivision, a site development plan application must accompany the other applications showing architecture and building footprints in accordance with the Q Overlay Zone unless the applicant wishes to delay proposing single family structures on the lots. 2. Architectural elevations must include the scale and height dimensions. Floor plans with square footage of each model must also be included. 3. Front and side yard dimensions must be shown on the tentative map/site plan. In Planned Developments, the average front yard setback measured from the location where structure is closest to the private/public street may not be less than 15 feet. Standard subdivisions require a 20 feet minimum front yard setback, 10% of lot width for side setbacks, and two times the side yard setback for rear setbacks. Please dimension all setbacks. Enqineerinq: 1. The plans submitted to this office reflect a change in the location of access onto Black Rail Road as we requested. The ultimate configuration of the public cul-de-sac 2075 Las Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad, CA 92009-l 576 - (760) 438-l 161 * FAX (760) 438-0894 -- 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. is a little unclear and should be shown. The alignment of the ultimate public street is shown only as an examole of an acceptable solution to provide adjacent access. I have listed our concerns in more detail below and on the red lined check print. The proposed design of the public street and the private gated bulb is considered substandard and is not supported by staff. We recommend a standard 56’ wide public street that splits the property line and runs up about % of the subdivision boundary. This alignment will provide reasonable access to adjacent properties and will allow intersection spacing for a gated community or knuckle. Please show distance to nearest/adjacent driveways (on both sides of the street). Also show the proposed intersection spacing schematic or show the nearest uphill and downhill intersection approved or planned by the City. This issue will be asked at the Planning Commission Mtg. and should be shown on the cover sheet for clarity. As mentioned above, please show a feasible solution to access the adjacent property from the proposed cul-de-sac. It appears that the 150’ intersection spacing has not been incorporated into this design. The opposing “T” intersections from this cul-de-sac should be 90 degrees to avoid driver conflict. The gate detail is not clear as to how the gate will open, how it will slide or swing, and if there will be a median in the middle to secure the lock. The proposed lot lines are not clear and the court yard or common driveway resolution should be addressed. It appears that panhandles are proposed and that vehicle turnaround would require private property access. Fail safe drainage systems should be shown. The private yard drains could plug with debris and a side yard overflow should be anticipated. Be aware of not flooding adjacent units and not eroding sensitive slopes. The hydrology study submitted failed to account for existing or uphill drainage onto Black Rail Road. The storm drain may need to be extended up hill to serve the adjacent properties. The hydrology study should also address the proposed yard drain system in lots 7 through 12 and continuing through lot “B”. The proposed outlet system should connect directly to the proposed storm drain. lO.The adjacent properties (Hadley and Carnation) have been approved as standard subdivisions. If changes are contemplated, we would suggest standard type lots without PUD restrictions. 11 .The proximity to the SDG&E tower is a concern to us all. The property line alignment may require a small wall to maintain a safe distance and slope clearance from the structure. All anticipated walls should be shown on the site plan. Attached are redlined check prints of the project for the applicant’s use. The applicant must return these check prints with the revised plans to assist staff in our continued review. If you or the applicant have any questions regarding the above, please call me (760) 438- II 61, extension 4477, or Clyde Wickham at extension 4353. Sincerely, Associate Planner AH:mh Attachment c: Chris DeCerbo Clyde Wickham Jack Henthorn & Associates File