HomeMy WebLinkAboutRP 00-17; KFC Taco Bell; Redevelopment Permits (RP) (4)Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
July 2, 2003
ZORAH HAMEDANY
TRICON GLOBAL RESTAURANTS
17901 VON KARMAN
IRVINE, CA 92614-6221
Re: KFC/Taco Bell located at 745 Carlsbad Village Dr, Carlsbad, CA 92008
Dear Zorah,
Now that the KFC/Taco Bell is compieted I wanted to let you know that it appears
the site is experiencing great success. Many people have complimented the
building design and the drive-thru layout has resulted in greater traffic flow and no
impacts to Madison Street. I know the process was quite long, longer than any of us
wanted it to be, but the results are something Tricon and the City can be proud of.
Thank you for working with us and for your diligence in seeing this project through to
completion.
1 am also requesting your assistance in resolving some issues that have recently
been brought to my attention. I received a letter from one of the business owners
located directly east of the KFC site. This business owner was supportive of your
redevelopment efforts, but is now experiencing some parking impacts as a result of
the modified circulation on the KFC site. I have attached a copy of the letter for your
review. As stated in the letter the business owner is working with his property
manager to do what they can do to improve the situation on their property. I am
requesting your assistance in persuading the KFC/Taco Bell management staff to
do their part as well.
It appears many KFC/Taco Bell customers are parking in the parking lot across the
alley and, at times, along the sides of the alley rather than circling around the block
and entering on Madison Street. As a result, trash from KFC/Taco Bell litters the
adjacent property and your neighbor loses what little parking they have available.
This may be as simple as reeducating your long-term customers that vehicular
access is limited to Madison Street only. However, in the time being, KFC/Taco Bell
management can do their part to discourage customers from parking on the
adjacent property or in the alley. Some additional signage may help. Also, might I
suggest that in an effort to be a good neighbor you have your empioyees pick up
and remove any KFC/Taco Bell trash from the adjacent property as part of the
current clean up process. By working together with your neighbors I believe these
issues can be quickly resolved. However, if left unattended, it has been my
experience that these situations only tend to escalate.
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037
Ms. Zorah Hamedany
July 2, 2003
Page No. 2
I would greatly appreciate any assistance you can provide to help resolve these
issues. If you have any questions regarding the information contained in this
correspondence, please contact my office at (760) 434-2813.
Sincerely,
CITY OF CARLSBAD
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
Housing and Redevelopment Director
Al Wanamaker
795 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
760-729-5448
JUN 25 20Q3
June 22,2003 -A .
Ms. Laurie Rosenstein
City of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Office
2965 Roosevelt St
Carlsbad, CA 92008
in re: KFC parking and trash problem
Dear Laurie,
Thank you for speaking with me on Thursday and hearing my concems about the problems we
are having with KFC/Taco Bell. I spoke with their manager, Mario, and he tells me there is little
he can do.
As tenants, we arrive almost daily to find KFC trash littering our parking lot. This trash and litter
has frequently been there all night and has attracted stray cats, birds and other vermin. Not a
healthy situation.
The other problem is with KFC customer parking. After the renovation of their property, access
to KFC from the alley was curtailed. Customers who miss the KFC lot at Madison Street tum
into the alley. Finding no access to KFC, they park in our lot. As you are aware, we have little
parking available for our own customers.
I can offer several solutions these problems. KFC cleans its own lot daily; they could clean ours
also. We don't have fast food or take-out, so 95% of the litter is from KFC customers. We will
be resurfacing and repainting our lot in a few weeks. We will have prominent signs that say
"NO KFC PARKING". We feel that although this may look bad, it is necessary. We do not
believe it will help the parking problem, however.
Any suggestion or help you can offer would be welcome.
J. Wanamaker
er
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
January 22, 2003
TONY CAPPARELLI
MAGNUM ENTERPRISES, INC
2515 WEST WOODLAND DRIVE
ANAHEIM, CA 92801
Re: KFC/TACO BELL REBUILD (RP00-17/CDP00-51) - 745 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE
As a result of my initial walk through for the final inspection of the above referenced project, the
following list of items must to be installed prior to Housing and Redevelopment staff signing off
on the final certificate of occupancy:
1. Tables and chairs for outdoor dining area must be installed per the approved plans.
2. The concrete masonry wall along the south property line must be painted with graffiti-
proof paint and flowering vines are to be planted along the base of the block wall with
support to trail up the face of the wall. The requirement for the vines was stipulated in
my September 5, 2002 correspondence to Schuss-Clark Architecture (see attached).
The vines were agreed to as part of a modified landscape plan for the landscape strip
along the south property line, which included maintaining the block wall in it's original
location rather than moving it further south and allowing for a drainage swale on the
north side of the wall.
3. In accordance with the approved landscape plan, trailing vines ("Happy Wanderer") are
to be planted along the base of columns along the west side of the building. This can
be accomplished by planting the vines in separated landscape planters.
If you have any questions regarding the information contained in this letter, please contact my
off ice at (760) 434-2813.
Sincerely,
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
c: David Rick, Engineering
Larry Black, Landscape Plan Check Consultant
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 @
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
September 5, 2002
ED GAN
SCHUSS-CLARK ARCHITECTURE
9474 KEARNY ViLLA ROAD
SUITE 215
SAN DIEGO, CA 92126
Re: KFCA'ACO BELL REBUILD (RP00-17/CDP00-51) - 745 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE
I met with Larry Black, landscape plan checker, and David Rick, project Engineer, to review the
revised landscape plans submitted on August 20, 2002. I have enclosed a red-lined set of the
landscape plans which includes the following requested revisions and points of clarification:
1. Add a note along the south property line stating, "Existing vegetation on south side of
block wall to remain".
2. On the north side of the same block wall include ground cover for drainage swale and
add a detail showing a flowing vine to be planted along the base of the block wall and
trailing up the face of the wall.
3. Relocate the back flow device further south (see comments from David Rick on grading
pian).
4. Identify the rectangular structure east of the walkway on Carlsbad Village Drive.
5. See additional red-lined comments from David Rick relating to revised drainage to
accommodate proposed vegetation.
Please combine these comments with those previously received by David Rick on the grading
plan and Larry Black on the landscape plan. If you have any questions regarding the
information contained in this letter, please contact my office at (760) 434-2813.
SincefGlVy^
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
c: David Rick, Engineering
Larry Black, Landscape Plan Check Consultant
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 @
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
September 5, 2002
ED GAN
SCHUSS-CLARK ARCHITECTURE
9474 KEARNY ViLLA ROAD
SUITE 215
SAN DIEGO, CA 92126
Re: KFC/TACO BELL REBUILD (RP00-17/CDP00-51) - 745 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE
I met with Larry Black, landscape plan checker, and David Rick, project Engineer, to review the
revised landscape plans submitted on August 20, 2002. I have enclosed a red-lined set of the
landscape plans which includes the following requested revisions and points of clarification:
1. Add a note along the south property line stating, "Existing vegetation on south side of
block wall to remain".
2. On the north side of the same block wall include ground cover for drainage swale and
add a detail showing a flowing vine to be planted along the base of the block wall and
trailing up the face of the wall.
3. Relocate the back flow device further south (see comments from David Rick on grading
plan).
4. Identify the rectangular structure east of the walkway on Carlsbad Village Drive.
5. See additional red-lined comments from David Rick relating to revised drainage to
accommodate proposed vegetation.
Please combine these comments with those previously received by David Rick on the grading
plan and Larry Black on the landscape plan. If you have any questions regarding the
information contained in this letter, please contact my office at (760) 434-2813.
Since
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
c: David Rick, Engineering
Larry Black, Landscape Plan Check Consultant
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 ®
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
July 30, 2002
HOWARD SCHUSS
SCHUSS-CLARK ARCHITECTURE
9474 KEARNY VILLA ROAD
SUITE 215
SANDIEGO, CA 92126
Re: KFC/TACO BELL REBUILD (RPOO-17/CDP00-51) - 745 CARLSBAD VILLAGE
DRIVE
In accordance with the conditions of approval for the above referenced project, prior to
the issuance of the building permit, the developer must submit a Notice of Restriction to
be filed in the office of the County Recorder notifying all interested parties and
successors in interest that the City of Carlsbad has issued a Major Redevelopment
Permit and Coastal Development Permit on the real property. I have enclosed said
notice which must be signed and notarized according to the directions contained on the
signature page. Please have your client sign the enclosed document and return to me
for processing and recordation.
Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813, if you have any questions regarding the
information contained in this letter.
Sincer
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 ^
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
July 25, 2002
BILL PONDER
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
SAN DIEGO DISTRICT
7575 METROPOLITAN DRIVE, SUITE 103
SAN DIEGO, CA 92108-4402
Re: Notice of Final Action for KFC/Taco Bell Rebuild
(RP 00-17/CDP 00-51)
Dear Bill:
Attached, please find a Notice of Final Action for the above referenced project. I
have also included a set of plans, a copy of the report that went to the Housing &
Redevelopment Commission, and the resolution of approval.
If you have any questions pertaining to the enclosed documents or require
additional information, please contact me at 760-434-2813.
Sincerely,
CITY OF CARLSBAD
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
Enclosures
2965 Roosevelt St.. Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 ^
May 1, 2002
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Housing and Redevelopment Department
SUMMARY OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING OF APRIL 29, 2002
The following represents a summary of the Design Review Board meeting held
on April 29, 2002:
RP00-17/CDP00-51 - KFC/TACO BELL REBUILD
The Design Review Board approved a recommendation (3-2, Marquez and
Baker opposing) to the Housing and Redevelopment Commission to approve
Major Redevelopment Permit No. RPOO-17 and Coastal Development Permit No.
CDPOO-51 for the demolition and reconstruction of an existing fast food
restaurant and drive-thru facility with a variance for a front building setback to
exceed the established standard on property located at 745 Carlsbad Village
Drive. The Board did not add any conditions to the project.
DEBBIE FOUNTAIN
Housing & Redevelopment Director
C: City Manager
City Attorney
Assistant City Manager
Financial Management Director
Community Development Director
Police Chief
Acting Fire Chief
Department Heads
Commission/Boards Liaisons
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
March 7, 2002
HOWARD SCHUSS
SCHUSS-CLARK ARCHITECTURE
9474 KEARNY VILLA ROAD
SUITE 215
SAN DIEGO, CA 92126
Re: KFC/TACO BELL REBUILD (RP00-17/CDP00-51) - 745 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE
The purpose of this letter is to follow-up on remaining issues of concern raised by various City
Departments following the latest review of the project plans submitted on February 21, 2002.
These Issues must be addressed prior to staff making a formal recommendation on the project.
Once all issues are resolved, the project will be added to the Design Review Board docket.
The remaining issues are as follows:
1. Engineering staff has completed its review of the revised plans for compliance with the
previously determined issues. In an effort to help expedite the processing of this project, City
staff engineer David Rick has contacted Hoss Farzad to discuss corrections that are still
required on the plans. David has also sent Hoss a redlined set of plans depicting the
requested changes.
2. Remaining Redevelopment issues are as follows:
a. At one point the floor plan showed the proposed seat layout. Since this no longer exists,
please indicate on the site plan the total number of seats proposed. Another option is to
add the seat layout to the floor plans.
b. There are still some remaining issues associated with the sign plan, raised in my prior
correspondence, that have not been addressed. Please revise the sign plan to include the
following:
1. Modify the building size listed under the signage requirements to show 92'-4" x 35'-9".
ii. 'Taco Bell" cloud signs may not be internally illuminated unless they are individual
channel letters, which they do not appear to be. Revise the plan to show external
illumination or revise the signage to show individually illuminated channel letters.
iii. Directional signs may not be internally illuminated. Revise to show external
illumination.
iv. Monument sign may not be internally illuminated. Revise to show external illumination.
v. Please use the current site plan for the sign program. The site plan included in the
sign packet is different from the current site plan for the remainder of the project and
still shows the monument sign at a diagonal to the intersection. The site plan for the
project shows the monument sign parallel to Madison Street and perpendicular to
Carisbad Village Drive. Revise for consistency.
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 @
KFC/Taco Bell Rebuild
03/07/2002
Page 2
vi. As a suggestion, not a requirement, consider a more interesting use of materials
for the wall signs that are more conducive to the overall architecture of the building.
Some suggestions include: a painted mural or tile mosaic for the KFC sign, or
carved wood for all signs.
vii. After reviewing the variance request to increase the sign area of the menu board
sign with the Housing & Redevelopment Director, the determination has been made
that staff will not support the granting of the variance. The maximum sign area of
the menu board signs is 24 square feet each. A maximum of two menu boards are
permitted. Option 1: reduced the size of the second menu board sign to 24 square
feet; or Option 2: eliminate the preview board and we can apply the maximum sign
area of both signs to the one menu board sign. Option 2 would allow 48 square feet
for the menu board without the need for a variance. Please keep in mind there are
some aspects of this project that will be considered controversial among different
City Council members, including the reconstruction of a drive-thru facility when the
City no longer permits drive-thru facilities for fast food restaurants. Staff
recommends that you eliminate the need to request any waivers (variances) from
the established standards.
3. Revise landscape plan to address the following landscape plan check comments:
a. Replace the 3 existing trees, located in proposed drive aisle and labeled lo be
removed", with 3 new 24-inch box Carrot Wood Trees in the landscaped strip along the
southern edge of the property.
b. To mitigate the removal of mature landscaping, the size of the proposed Carrot Wood
Trees shall be Increased from 24-inch box to 48-inch box.
c. Clarify If the 14" tree shown on the east side of the property is an existing tree to remain.
Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813, if you have any questions regarding the Information
contained in this letter.
Sincer
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
c: Debbie Fountain, Housing & Redevelopment Director
David Rick, Engineering
Larry Black, Landscape Plan Check Consultant
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
February 7, 2002
HOWARD SCHUSS
SCHUSS-CLARK ARCHITECTURE
9474 KEARNY VILLA ROAD
SUITE 215
SANDIEGO, CA 92126
Re: KFC/TACO BELL REBUILD (RP00-17/CDP00-51) - 745 CARLSBAD VILLAGE
DRIVE
The purpose of this letter is to follow-up on remaining issues of concern raised by
various City Departments following the latest review of the project plans submitted on
January 8, 2002. A list of remaining issues is attached for your review. These issues
must be addressed prior to staff making a formal recommendation on the project.
Given that there are several issues still pending, this project will not be scheduled for
the February Design Review Board hearing. Once all issues are resolved, the project
will be added to the Design Review Board docket.
Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813, if you have any questions regarding the
information contained in this letter.
Sincecely,
Wf^4^
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
c: Debbie Fountain, Housing & Redevelopment Director
David Rick, Engineering
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 @
ISSUES OF CONCERN
No. RP00-17/CDP00-51
Staff has completed the latest review of the subject project for issues of concern. The
following items need to be resolved or adequately addressed prior to staff formulating a
recommendation on the proposed project: (Please note, the issues are listed under the
department which identified them as an area of concern.)
ENGINEERING:
The Engineering Department has completed its review of the above referenced project for
compliance with the previously determined issues. Some of the Issues previously
mentioned were not addressed and because new plans were submitted which had
new or changed Information from the previous plan, some new comments were
made as well. Therefore, this project still has some issues that must be addressed. The
following is a list of these issues:
1. On the site plan, cleariy illustrate the layout of the parking stalls and structures
across the alley. The plans currently label the area as "Asphalt Paved Parking" but
I want you to show the actual spaces that abut the alley. In addition, revise the
grading plan to either be consistent with the site plan or remove this information
entirely to allow the site plan to be the sole provider of this information. Currently,
the grading plan shows an existing commercial building.
2. On previous plan checks, we have asked that you utilize the 5 foot wide
landscaped area as a means of storm water filtration to capture pollutants (oils,
heavy metals, etc.) which accumulate on the drive-thru driveway. For reasons not
understood, the plans have not been revised to reflect this comment. Please
address. The following is my comment as written in the previous letter sent to you
from Lori Rosenstein on December 21, 2001: "It has become increasingly
apparent that the use of fossil filters alone does not adequately address storm
water pollutant runoff. Another best management practice that is less prone to
failure or less likely to be neglected for any required maintenance is to install a
vegetated swale to collect storm water runoff. This method was suggested in one
of my eariier letters. Unless you have a better alternative acceptable to the City,
replace the new planter along the south property line with a grass-lined swale from
the trash enclosure westward and remove the curb to allow the passage of sheet
flow. Provide flow line elevations within the grass swale. The proposed
topography of the parking lot would need to be altered to direct drainage to this
swale along the length of the drive-thru. Place a drain inlet at the end of this swale
near the driveway entrance on Madison Street. This drain could discharge via a
curb outlet on Madison Street. The drain from the inlet within the trash enclosure
could still connect with this inlet as currently proposed."
3. Provide invert elevations in the drain inlets and at the curb outlets.
4. The maximum driveway width permitted is 40 feet. The grading plan labels the
new driveway as 42 feet wide yet the scale indicates 32 feet wide. Please clarify.
Also, make sure the driveway width and design between the site plan and
grading plan are consistent.
5. The maximum pipe size permitted within a 6" curb is 3 inches. Reduce the pipe
size accordingly provided that the pipes can accommodate flow. No more than 2
outlets are permitted at the curb.
6. The maximum cross fall within the parking lot is 5%. The grade is currently
proposed at 5.8%. Also, provide a minimum grade of 1% within the concrete "v"
gutter.
7. The monument signs are not plotted in the same location between the site plan
and grading plan. Plot the new sign as originally approved on previous plan
checks. Also, indicate that the existing monument sign at the corner is to be
removed.
A redlined plan has been enclosed depicting the corrections listed above. This
redlined plan must be returned with the next submittal to expedite processing of
the land use permit. If you have any questions regarding engineering issues, please
contact David Rick in the Engineering Department at 602-2781.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT:
The Housing & Redevelopment Department has completed its review of the above
referenced project for compliance with the previously determined issues. The following
corrections are still needed:
Sign Plan: Many of the comments made in the January 2"^ letter to you regarding the
sign plan were not rectified. It is important to note the sign plan is considered part of
the Major Redevelopment Permit and will be reviewed as part of the land use permit for
the project.
1. The monument sign is shown in a different location on the site plan than on the
sign plan. Please change for consistency. (See Engineering comment #7)
2. The logo signs mav not be internally illuminated, unless they consist of channel
letters. All other signs may be externally illuminated.
3. The drive-thru directional signs may not exceed 30 inches in height above
existing grade. Please revise.
4. The menu board signs may not exceed 6 feet in height above existing grade,
includinq anv siqn base. Please revise both menu boards.
5. The sign area of the menu board signs may not exceed 24 square feet. Please
revise both menu boards. Note: the logo on the base of the preview menu board
counts as sign area.
6. The maximum permitted sign area for the monument sign is 24 square feet. The
sign area of the monument sign is shown as 4'-1" x 6'. Please change to 4' x 6'
or similar. The height of the monument sign is satisfactory. Onlv include one
monument siqn in the siqn plan. Option 2 is preferred over option 1.
7. The sign plan must include a table showing the following information:
a. Total building street frontage;
b. Total sign area allowed (1 square foot of signage per linear foot of building
frontage);
c. Total sign area proposed (monument sign plus wall signs).
Site Plan:
8. The site plan still includes an error on the parking information. Please show
required parking at 1:200 not 1:20.
Other:
9. Please include a color and materials board showing actual colors and materials
depicted in colored elevation.
10. For the Design Review Board hearing, colored elevations of all sides of the
building will be required.
11. The red-lined landscape plan was never resubmitted to complete the landscape
plan check process. Please return with the revised plans.
Please submit 3 sets of revised plans to the Housing & Redevelopment Department
addressing all issues. Once all issues have been addressed to the satisfaction of both
departments, the project will be scheduled for a Design Review Board hearing.
For questions regarding Housing & Redevelopment Department comments, please
contact Lori Rosenstein at 760-434-2813.
I V
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
January 2, 2002
HOWARD SCHUSS
SCHUSS-CLARK ARCHITECTURE
9474 KEARNY VILLA ROAD
SUITE 215
SAN DIEGO, CA 92126
Re: KFC/TACO BELL REBUILD (RPOO-17/CDP00-51) - 745 CARLSBAD VILLAGE
DRIVE
In my last correspondence to you, dated December 21, 2001, I outlined the remaining
issues of concern raised by various City Departments following review of the project
plans submitted on November 21, 2001. Two of the remaining Housing &
Redevelopment issues that were not addressed In my December 21®* correspondence
were comments on the proposed building colors and the proposed sign plan. The
purpose of this letter is follow-up on those two issues as promised, as weli as, provide
feedback on the landscape plan.
Building Colors: After reviewing the two color schemes submitted for the project with
the Housing & Redevelopment Director, it was determined that Scheme B is preferred
over Scheme A. In addition, there was no support for the various colored awnings. It is
staff's opinion that a[l the awnings should be a solid red fabric as shown over the front
entry on the front elevation. Red appears to be the most appropriate accent color for
compatibility with the proposed roof and buildings colors of Scheme B.
Sign Plan: Modifications must be made to the sign plan to be consistent with the
following Village Redevelopment Area sign guidelines:
1. The Village Redevelopment Master Plan is silent on the issue of menu boards
for drive-thru establishments. Therefore, the standards set forth in the City of
Carisbad Sign Ordinance were used to determine development standards for the
menu boards. Two menu boards are permitted. The maximum sign area is 24
square feet per sign. The maximum height of the sign is 6 feet above existing
grade, including any sign base. The maximum letter height is 2 inches.
2. Drive-thru directional sign may not exceed 30 inches in height and 4 square feet
in sign area.
3. Only one monument is permitted. The sign area of monument sign may not
exceed 24 square feet. Maximum height of a monument sign is 60 inches,
including any sign base. Monument sign mav not be internally illuminated.
Externally illuminated is permitted. The logo as shown on Option 2 is preferred
over Option 1, but either design is fine.
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 ^
\ KFC/Taco Bell Rebuild
RP00-17/CDP00-51
Page 2
4. The total sign area permitted for the site must include the sign area of the
monument sign, as well as the wall signs. The menu board signs and the drive-
thru directional sign are not included in the total sign area calculation.
5. Please show where the second set of Taco Bell letters is proposed on the
building elevations. The plans only show one set on the right side elevation.
6. Wall signs may only be internally illuminated if they are channel letters. Please
indicate how the wall signs for the Taco Bell logo and KFC logo will be
illuminated.
Roof Plan: While this was not addressed in my December 21®* correspondence to you,
it would be helpful to include a roof plan in the two sets of revised plans requested of
you previously to show the location of roof equipment and the 5:12 roof pitch elements.
Landscape Plan: The City's landscape plan check consultant has completed his first
review of the proposed landscape plan. This review was delayed awaiting resolution of
final engineering site design issues regarding drainage, because final resolution of
these issues could impact the location of proposed landscaping. The comments on the
landscape plan are provided in "red" on the enclosed plan check set. Please modify the
landscape plan to incorporate these changes and return two copies of the revised
landscape plan, along with the enclosed red-lined check print set, to the Housing &
Redevelopment Department for final processing.
Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813, if you have any questions regarding the
information contained in this letter.
Sincerely,
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
December 21, 2001
HOWARD SCHUSS
SCHUSS-CLARK ARCHITECTURE
9474 KEARNY VILLA ROAD
SUITE 215
SANDIEGO, CA 92126
Re: KFC/TACO BELL REBUILD (RP00-17/CDP00-51) - 745 CARLSBAD VILLAGE
DRIVE
The purpose of this letter is to follow-up on remaining issues of concern raised by
various City Departments following the latest review of the project plans submitted on
November 21, 2001. A list of remaining issues is attached for your review. These
issues must be addressed prior to staff making a formal recommendation on the
project.
Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813, if you have any questions or wish to set up
a meeting to discuss the proposed project.
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
c: Debbie Fountain, Housing & Redevelopment Director
David Rick, Engineering
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 @
ISSUES OF CONCERN
No. RPOO-17/CDP00-51
Staff has completed the latest review of the subject project for issues of concern. The
following items need to be resolved or adequately addressed prior to staff formulating a
recommendation on the proposed project: (Please note, the issues are listed under the
department which identified them as an area of concern.)
ENGINEERING:
The Engineering Department has completed its review of the above referenced project for
compliance with the previously determined issues. The project still has some issues that
must be addressed. The following is a list of these issues:
1. Clearly illustrate the layout of the parking stalls and structures across the alley.
2. Label the material used for the parking lot and driveway isles. Will the surface be
A.C. or P.C.C?
3. It has become increasingly apparent that the use of fossil filters alone does not
adequately address storm water pollutant runoff. Another best management
practice that is less prone to failure or less likely to be neglected for any required
maintenance is to install a vegetated swale to collect storm water runoff. This
method was suggested in one of my eariier letters. Unless you have a better
alternative acceptable to the City, replace the new planter along the south
property line with a grass-lined swale from the trash enclosure westward and
remove the curb to allow the passage of sheet flow. Provide flow line elevations
within the grass swale. The proposed topography of the parking lot would need
to be altered to direct drainage to this swale along the length of the drive-thru.
Place a drain inlet at the end of this swale near the driveway entrance on
Madison Street. This drain could discharge via a curb outlet on Madison Street.
The drain from the inlet within the trash enclosure could still connect with this
inlet as currently proposed.
As for the drain inlet and filter collecting the parking lot storm water runoff, I do
not see the opportunity to provide an adequate vegetated swale due to utility and
landscape (e.g. large trees and shrubs) conflicts. Therefore, the filter appears to
be the best choice at this location. However, any suggestions for an alternative
design are encouraged.
4. Provide invert elevations in the drain inlets and at the curb outlets.
5. Provide a more recent "Daily Destination By Hour" report for the subject site.
Please obtain data on a weekday that would represent typical drive thru traffic
(e.g. no bad weather, holidays, detoured traffic, etc.). Also, determine the
average, shortest and longest drive-thru pick-up time between vehicles during
the peak hour (12 pm to 1 pm) for the subject site.
If you have any questions regarding engineering issues, please contact David Rick in
the Engineering Department at 602-2781.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT:
1. On sheets Cl and C3 please modify parking information in summary table to read
as follows:
Parking spaces required (1:200): 16 spaces
Parking spaces provided: 20 spaces
2. On sheets Cl and C3 please provide lot size information.
3. On sheet A4 please remove keynotes 10 and 21. Awnings may not be illuminated.
4. Staff has not made a final determination on the colors or proposed sign plan.
Comments on these items will be fonA/arded to you after December 31, 2001.
Please submit 2 sets of revised plans to the Housing & Redevelopment Department
addressing all Engineering Department and Housing and Redevelopment Department
issues. Once all issues have been addressed to the satisfaction of both departments,
the project will be scheduled for a Design Review Board hearing.
In an effort to help expedite the processing of this application the following information
is being provided to you. In preparation for the Design Review Board hearing, please
be advised that the following items will be required:
1. Public Notification Package: The public notification package shall be submitted at
least fifteen (15) days prior to the DRB hearing and shall include the following
information:
a. A typewritten list of the names and addresses of all property owners within a 600'
radius of subject property (including the applicant and/or owner). The list shall
include the San Diego County Assessor's parcel number from the latest
assessment rolls.
b. 600' Radius Map: A map to scale not less than 1" = 200' showing each lot within
600' of the exterior boundaries of the subject property. Each of these lots shall
be consecutively numbered and correspond with the property owners list.
c. Two (2) separate sets of mailing labels of the property owners within a 600'
radius of the subject property. The list must be typed in all CAPITAL LETTERS,
left justified, void of punctuation. For any address other than single-family
residence, an apartment, suite or building number must be included on a
separate line. DO NOT include it in the street address line. DO NOT TYPE
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER ON LABELS. DO NOT provide addressed
envelopes - PROVIDE LABELS ONLY.
UNACCEPTABLE UNACCEPTABLE ACCEPTABLE
Mrs. Jane Smith
123 Magnolia Ave., Apt #3
Carisbad, CA 92008
Mrs. Jane Smith
123 Magnolia Ave.
Apt. #3
Carisbad, CA 92008
MRS JANE SMITH
APT 3
123 MAGNOLIA AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
d. For Coastal Zone projects, in addition to the above, please provide one (1) list of
the occupants/addresses located within a 100' radius of the project site; and two
(2) sets of labels (as described above) of the addresses within a 100' radius.
2. At least ten (10) days prior to the DRB hearing the following items shall be
submitted to the IHousing & Redevelopment Office:
a. One (1) copy of a full sized colored site plan (rolled, not mounted).
One (1) copy of a colored rendering of the front elevation accurately depicting
the proposed mature landscaping and how it relates to the building (rolled, not
mounted).
Ten (10) sets of final full size plans folded to SV2" xll".
One (1) set of 8I/2" xll" reduced plans.
Optional: ten (10) sets of SV2" xll" reduced colored building elevations.
Electronic files of the colored site plan, colored rendering, and all building
elevations presented on disk or sent via e-mail to I rose @ ci.carisbad .ca. us
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
For questions regarding Housing & Redevelopment Department comments, please
contact Lori Rosenstein at 760-434-2813.
FIRE:
There are no remaining Fire Department issues of concern. Standard Fire Department
conditions will be incorporated into the resolution for the project.
CITY OF CARLSBAD
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
December 20,2001
TO: Lori Rosenstein - Redevelopment Department
FROM: David Rick - Public Works Department
ISSUES 4th REVIEW
PROJECTID: RP00-17/CDP00-51 KFC/TACO BELL REBUILD
The Engineering Department has completed its review of the above referenced project for compliance with
the previously determined issues. The project still has some issues that must be addressed. The following is
a list of these issues:
1. Clearly illustrate the layout of the parking stalls and structures across the alley.
2. Label the material used for the parking lot and driveway isles. Will the surface be A.C. or
P.C.C?
3. It has become increasingly apparent that the use of fossil filters alone does not adequately
address storm water pollutant runoff. Another best management practice that is less prone to
failure or less likely to be neglected for any required maintenance is to install a vegetated swale
to collect storm water runoff. This method was suggested in one of my earlier letters. Unless
you have a better alternative acceptable to the City, replace the new planter along the south
property line with a grass-lined swale from the trash enclosure westward and remove the curb to
allow the passage of sheet flow. Provide flow line elevations within the grass swale. The
proposed topography of the parking lot would need to be altered to direct drainage to this swale
along the length of the drive-thru. Place a drain inlet at the end of this swale near the driveway
entrance on Madison Street. This drain could discharge via a curb outlet on Madison Street.
The drain from the inlet within the trash enclosure could still connect with this inlet as currently
proposed.
As for the drain inlet and filter collecting the parking lot storm water runoff, I do not see the
opportunity to provide an adequate vegetated swale due to utility and landscape (e.g. large trees
and shrubs) conflicts. Therefore, the filter appears to be the best choice at this location.
However, any suggestions for an alternative design are encouraged.
4. Provide invert elevations in the drain inlets and at the curb outlets.
5. Provide a more recent "Daily Destination By Hour" report for the subject site. Please obtain data
on a weekday that would represent typical drive thru traffic (e.g. no bad weather, holidays,
detoured traffic, etc.). Also, determine the average, shortest and longest drive-thru pick-up time
between vehicles during the peak hour (12 pm to 1 pm) for the subject site.
If you or the applicant has any questions regarding the above, please either see or call me at extension 2781.
David Rick
Assistant Engineer - Engineering Development Services Division
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
July 20, 2001
DOUG MASSARO
A&S ENGINEERING
207 W.ALAMEDA AVE.
SUITE 203
BURBANK, CA 91502
Re: KFC/TACO BELL REBUILD (RPOO-17/CDP00-51) - 745 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE
Per your request, the tentative date set for review of the above referenced project by the Carlsbad Design
Review Board is Monday, August 27, 2001. The Design Review Board meeting starts at 6:00pm in the
City Council Chambers located at 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive. An agenda will be sent to you along with
the staff report to the Design Review Board one week prior to the meeting date.
As a reminder, we will need an updated public notification package submitted by August 13, 2001, as the
one that was submitted previously is more than 6 months old. The public notification package shall
include all information outlined below:
1. A typewritten list of the names and addresses of all property owners within a 600' radius of subject
property (including the applicant and/or owner). The list shall include the San Diego County
Assessor's parcel number from the latest assessment rolls.
2. Two (2) separate sets of mailing labels of the property owners within a 600' radius of the subject
property. The list must be typed in all CAPITAL LETTERS, left justified, void of punctuation. For
any address other than single-family residence, an apartment, suite or building number must be
included on a separate line. DO NOT include it in the street address line. DO NOT TYPE
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER ON LABELS. DO NOT provide addressed envelopes -
PROVIDE LABELS ONLY. Acceptable fonts are: Swiss 721, Enterprise TM or Courier New (TT)
no larger than 11 pt. Sample labels are as follows:
UNACCEPTABLE UNACCEPTABLE ACCEPTABLE
Mrs. Jane Smith
123 Magnolia Ave., Apt #3
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Mrs. Jane Smith
123 Magnolia Ave.
Apt. #3
Carlsbad, CA 92008
MRS JANE SMITH
APT 3
123 MAGNOLIA AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
3. ICQ' Radius Occupants/Address List and Labels: One (1) list of the occupants/addresses
located within a 100' radius of the project site; and two (2) sets of labels (as described in "A"
above) of the addresses within a 100' radius.
If you have any questions regarding the information contained in this letter please contact my office at
760-434-2813.
Sincofely,.^,^^^
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 ®
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
June 6, 2001
DOUG MASSARO
A&S ENGINEERING
207 W. ALAMEDA AVE.
SUITE 203
BURBANK, CA 91502
Re: KFC/TACO BELL REBUILD (RPOO-17/CDP00-51) - 745 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE
The Housing & Redevelopment Department has completed its review of the plans submitted on
May 9, 2001. The comments contained in this letter are intended to focus on the architectural
design issues associated with the project. While the latest architectural revisions to the project
appear to be an improvement over previous designs, staff still cannot support nor recommend
approval of this project for the following reasons:
• The project contains incompatible architectural elements. For example, the style of
dormers added to the Madison Street elevation seem to conflict with the
Spanish/Mediterranean architecture of the rest of the building. In addition, the glass
window panels and the wood trellis arbors added to the Madison Street elevation
seem to conflict with remainder of the building. Clearly they were added in response
to our last set of comments requesting more articulation, however, they don't seem
to fit with the new design.
• Different elements of the building design seem to lack transition. For instance, the
central element of the Madison Street elevation does not smoothly transition into the
rear element. The roofiine stops abruptly after the last column. The same is true for
the alley facing elevation.
• Placement of the tower elements appears awkward and lacks symmetry. While the
tower elements appear to be asymmetrical on the front building elevation, the floor
plan and building elevations indicate a 15' off-set with the Taco Bell tower situated
33' from the front of the building and the KFC tower located 18' from the front of the
building. In addition, the KFC tower extends out from the building and is supported
by columns while the Taco Bell tower sits directly on top of the building.
• The building elevation facing the alley lacks the same architectural interest as the
elevation on the opposite side of the building (facing Madison Street). The roofiine
of the central element of the building elevation facing the alley should mimic the
roofiine of that same portion of the building facing Madison Street. However, due to
the width of the drive-thru, to do so looks like it would create a drainage issue.
• In the absence of a roof plan, it is impossible to determine if the project meets the
minimum 5:12 roof pitch required throughout the Village Redevelopment Area.
Following my last conversation with your architect, Hoss Farzad, I expressed that City staff was
looking for an architectural design that maintained a consistent architectural theme with
appropriate architectural features and details. This remains our position, as I do not feel this
objective was achieved in the latest redesign. In my last conversation with Mr. Farzad, he
expressed that only so much could be done to the design of the building without impacting the
floor plan and site design layout, which is based on optimum on-site circulation of the drive-thru.
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 ^
KFC/Taco Bell Rebuild
RP00-17/CDP00-51
6/6/01
Page 2
At this point in time, I do not have any suggestions to offer to improve the building design
enough to warrant staff's support for this project. I believe we have come to a point where we
should agree to disagree. Therefore, should you desire to take the project fonA/ard to the
Design Review Board as presently designed staff will schedule the appropriate hearing and
offer a recommendation for denial without prejudice. This will allow you to submit a redesigned
project without waiting the mandatory 12-month period if the Housing & Redevelopment
Commission supports staffs recommendation for denial. On the other hand, if the Design
Review Board recommends approval of the project to the Housing & Redevelopment
Commission staff will prepare the appropriate resolutions of approval.
If you desire to take the project forward as currently designed, please submit your request in
writing to the Housing & Redevelopment Department and the project will be docketed for review
by the Design Review Board. Before you do so, however, I must caution you that it appears the
remaining engineering issues, outlined in our April 18, 2001 letter, were not addressed on the
revised plans submitted on May 9th. A copy of our April 18, 2001 letter is attached for
reference. In addition to the engineering comments sent to you in writing, engineering staff
returned to you a redlined check print set visually depicting the written comments. The redlined
copy was not returned to us with the revised plans as requested in our previous
correspondence. Staff suggests prior to submitting your request to take the proposed project
forward to the Design Review Board that you resolve all outstanding site plan issues with
Engineering Department staff.
If you have any questions regarding the information contained in this letter please contact my
office at 760-434-2813.
Sincer
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
c: Debbie Fountain, Housing & Redevelopment Director
David Rick, Engineering Department
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
April 18, 2001
DOUG MASSARO
A&S ENGINEERING
207 W. ALAMEDA AVE.
SUITE 203
BURBANK, CA 91502
Re: KFC/TACO BELL REBUILD - 745 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE
As you know we are still working on resolving the final architectural design of the above referenced
project. In the time being, I have asked all other City departments to review the last site plan submittal to
insure all other issues have been resolved. The only outstanding issues identified are from the
Engineering DepartmenL Remaining engineering issues include the following:
1. On the preliminary grading plan, the contour lines suggest that the drive-thru lane will be at a 10% grade
near the preview menu board. Distribute the driveway grades to be more uniform and gradual. Also, the
grade near the inlet at the southwest corner of the property is at 0.4%. The minimum grade permissible
on A.C. is 1.0%. Please revise accordingly.
2. Label the material used for the parking lot and driveway isles. Will the surface be A.C. or P.C.C?
3. As we develop a greater understanding of NPDES requirements it has become increasingly apparent
that the use of fossil filters alone does not adequately address storm water pollutant runoff. Another
method, which is less prone to failure or less likely to be neglected for any required maintenance, is to
install a vegetated swale to collect storm water runoff. This method was suggested in one of my earlier
letters. Unless you have a better alternative to propose, you may want to consider the following: Replace
the new planter along the south property line with a grass-lined swale. The curb along the south side of
the drive-thru could either be removed or contain numerous openings for passage of drainage. Place a
drain inlet (no fossil filter needed) at the end of this swale near the driveway entrance on Madison Street.
This drain could discharge at the curb on Madison Street as currently proposed. The drain from the inlet
within the trash enclosure could still connect with this inlet as currently proposed.
As for the drain inlet and filter collecting the parking lot storm water runoff, I do not see the opportunity
to provide an adequate vegetated swale due to utility and landscape (e.g. large trees and shrubs)
conflicts. Therefore, the filter appears to be the best choice at this location. However, any
suggestions for an alternative design are encouraged.
4. Provide invert elevations in the drain inlets and at the curb outlets.
If you have any questions regarding the engineering issues outlined above please contact Project Engineer
David Rick at 602-2781. David has also provided a redlined check print set visually depicting his comments,
which is enclosed for your use. Please return this redlined copy with your revised plans to assist in final
project review.
Sinc-
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
c: David Rick, Engineering Department
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
March 14, 2001
HOSS FARZAD
A&S ENGINEERING
207 W. ALAMEDA AVE.
SUITE 203
BURBANK, CA 91502
FAX 818-842-3760
Re: KFC/TACO BELL REBUILD - 745 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE
I have reviewed the plan design faxed to my office on March 1, 2001. It is my position that the
project design remains inconsistent with the Village Master Plan and Design Manual. As I have
expressed to you in our telephone conversations, staff is interested in achieving an overall
project design that incorporates the "Village character" as discussed in the Master Plan. You
have asked me to tell you specifically what changes we would like to see to achieve the desired
look. However, I do not believe it is as simple as that. To start with, for the past several
months staff has addressed the need for major modifications to the building design such as
incorporating a minimum 5:12 roof pitch. The required roof pitch is a specific development
regulation and cannot be waived without the granting of a variance by the Housing and
Redevelopment Commission. Furthermore, I do not believe there are grounds for granting the
required variance. Over the past several months I have reviewed three different plan revisions
that include different types of architectural "plant-ons", but none have addressed the roof pitch
issue, which was first addressed in a written letter to A & S Engineering, dated October 13,
2000, following the initial plan review. I understand the need for space on the roof to locate and
vent necessary roof equipment. As such, we are willing to consider a design that incorporates
the required roof pitch along the perimeter of the building with a flat roof in the middle to screen
proposed equipment. I have discussed this project with the City's Principal Building Inspector
and he has verified that there is no reason from a building code perspective to preclude you
from achieving this design.
In addition to the incorporation of the roof pitch, I urge you to rethink the style of architecture
you are trying to achieve. We have several examples of Victorian, Old-Worid Bavarian, and
Spanish Mediterranean architecture in the Village. All of which are acceptable in terms of
achieving the "Village character". Most important to the architecture of the building is
emphasizing a small scale, pedestrian orientation. This can be achieved by incorporating
"human scale" elements on all sides of the building, such as entry features, outdoor dining
areas, and covered or trellised walkways to name a few. Having stated that, I must stress that
it is the overall look of the building and not merely the incorporation of specific architectural
features that is most important.
There have not been any recently approved fast food restaurants in the redevelopment area for
me to point to as examples of desirable design. However, you might want to look at the Village
Faire Shopping Center located at the northeast corner of Carlsbad Blvd. and Carisbad Village
Drive, which includes both sit down and fast food restaurants. The design of the shopping
center is a Victorian influence and they have done a good job of screening their roof equipment.
Another example is the Olde Worid Center located at the northeast corner of Grand Avenue
and Roosevelt Street, which includes a restaurant on-site and is an excellent example of
achieving the "Village character". A third example of desirable design is the Fish House Vera
Cruz restaurant located at 417 Carisbad Village Drive. This project incorporates the required
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037
KFC Project
3/14/01
Page 2
roof pitch utilizing red-clay tiles. A parapet at the center of the building screens the restaurant's
roof equipment.
As you can see, there are numerous ways architecturally to achieve the required development
standards and design features contained within the Village Master Plan. It will certainly require
some creativity on your part to transform the standard corporate KFC design into something
that is consistent with our Village design guidelines, but it is clearly achievable. In conclusion,
we have made it very clear from day one, when we originally sat down with representatives of
KFC to discuss the feasibility of the project, that the standard corporate designs of most fast
food restaurants prove to be inconsistent with the Village design guidelines and will not be
supported by staff. At that time, KFC representatives assured us that the building would be
designed specifically for this particular site in a manner that is unique to the area and consistent
with the Village Design Manual. This has not proven to be the case, because the plans I have
reviewed thus far are identical to or slightly modified versions of the KFC/Taco Bell building
previously constructed in Oceanside and, as I have stated repeatedly, the design is inconsistent
with the Village Design Guidelines.
It is my hope that these comments prove to be helpful in providing some clear-cut direction on
the project design so that we may end up with a building that staff can support and KFC can be
proud of. If you have any questions regarding the information contained in this letter please
contact my office at (760) 434-2813.
Sincerely,
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
c: Doug Massaro, A&S Engineering
Debbie Fountain, Housing & Redevelopment Director
Pat Kelley, Principal Building Inspector
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
February 1, 2001
DOUG MASSARO
A&S ENGINEERING
207 W. ALAMEDA AVE.
SUITE 203
BURBANK, CA 91502
Re: KFC/TACO BELL REBUILD - 745 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE
The attached list outlines the remaining issues of concern raised by staff in our letter to
you dated December 14, 2000. It is staffs position that these issues have not been
adequately addressed. In recent conversations you have made it clear that you do not
intend to further modify the design of the building in response to the issue raised by
staff that the design is inconsistent with the Village Master Plan and Design Manual. As
we also discussed, you have the right to request the project be taken fonA/ard to the
Design Review Board for their determination without staffs support on the design of the
structure.
In addition to architectural issues, the attached list includes remaining engineering
issues related to site design. Please review the attached list and let me know how you
would like to proceed on this project. I can be reached at (760) 434-2813.
Sincere,,, _
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
David Rick, Engineering Department
Mike Grim, Planning Department
Pat Kelley, Building Department
Mike Smith, Fire Department
Larry Black, Landscape Plancheck
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 @
ISSUES OF CONCERN
No. RPOO-17/CDP 00-51
The following Departments have completed their third review of the subject project for issues of
concern. These issues should be resolved prior to resubmittal.
Housing & Redevelopment:
1. The building design remains inconsistent with the Village Master Plan and Design Manual.
Staff continues to support a comprehensive redesign as discussed in previous
correspondence.
Engineering:
The Engineering Department has completed its review of the above referenced project for
compilance with the previously determined issues. The project still has issues that must be
addressed. The following is a list of these issues:
1. On the preliminary grading plan, use spot elevations and additional drainage arrows to
illustrate how storm water will be directed to the drain inlets equipped with fossil filters. The
flow as currently shown is circumventing the inlets at several locations. The drain inlets must
receive storm water collected over the maximum amount of on-site pavement possible (see
redlined plan for example of type of information required). In addition, we need the post
development runoff and predevelopment (existing condition) runoff quantities determined as
previously requested. If the post development runoff amounts are greater than the existing
runoff from the property, then provisions such as constructing an infiltration basin may need to
be incorporated into the design. Such a provision would alter the site design.
Also, remove the underground drain connected between the trash receptacle inlet and the
curb outlet on Carisbad Village Drive. Instead, connect the drain to the proposed inlet at the
southwest corner of the property. Making this connection will reduce the amount of curb cores
from three to two. City policy is to minimize the number of curb cores.
2. The boundary of the SDG&E easement (File No. 74-315688) is unclear. One leader points to
the parking lot curb and the other to the existing location of the utility box?
3. The single trash receptacle design shown on the site plan is acceptable. However, the
landscape plan needs to be revised to show the same design.
4. Remove the meter from the fire sprinkler line. A meter is included on the double check valve
so a separate meter is not necessary. Also, place the backflow device so that it abuts the
property line.
5. According to your most recent letter, you referred to traffic count records dated January 5**^
2001. Please provide a copy of these records.
Landscape Plancheck:
1. A revised landscape plan has not submitted. Please submit a revised landscape plan in
response to the corrections included on Sheets L-1 and L-2 shown on the red-lined check
print set previously sent to you. The red-lined check print set must be returned with the
modified plans to assist staff in its continued review of the proiect.
1-24-2001 4:32PM FRQM ^ ENGINEERING 5109330588 P - 1
lO A&S ENGINEERING INC.
PLANNING • ENGINEERING • CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
1243 ALPINE ROAD. STE. 109. WAUyRlT CREEK, CA. 94S96 * PHOME; 825-933^578 • PAX 925-933-0588
RECEIVED
Wednesday, January 24,2001 JAN 2 4 2001
Carisbad Redevelopment Agency ««..j5irfo°E.5^SiS?SS.« ^Qii<iT>^.^.r^UQ* HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT 2965 Roosevelt St. DEPARTMENT m
Carlsbad CA 92008-2389
Fax 760 720 2037
Attn: Lori Rosenstein
Re: design variance for KFC/Taco Bell, 745 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Dear Ads Rosenstein,
Please accept the following findings as justification to grant a design variance for tke
proposed KFC/Taco Bell restaurant:
1) The requirement ofa 5 to 12 roofpitch for a majority of the roofiine cannot he
achieved for the restaurant. The requirement is creating an unreasonable hardship
on the owner.
2) The restaurant utilizes mechanical roof-mounted equipment which carmot be
.screened by a 5:12 roofpitch. The types of equipment are generally not used by
other facilities in the vicinity.
3) The variance will not be injurious to other properties in the vicinity because the
restaurant complies with development guidelines arui building codes. The goveming
development guidelines and building codes prevent the restaurantfrom materially
harming the public welfare.
4} The granting of the design variance will not corflict with the village master plan.
If you have any questions or need additional irformatiOn, please call me at 925-933-
0578.
Sincerely,
Doug Massaro
RECEIVED
January 22, 2001
JAN 2 / 2001
uA.JSlBfP''CARLSBAD
TO: MANAGEMENT ANALYST "^'"Eea^Nf «^
FROM: Senior Planner
REDEVELOPMENT PERMIT COMMENTS AND NOTICES OF EXEMPTION
Sorry for taking so long to get back to you on these items, I'm finally catching up
on all the work that I missed. Attached are the recorded copies of Notices of
Exemption for The Potted Palm (RP 00-08), Carisbad Inn Cell Site (RP 99-17)
and Metricom Internet Antennas (RP 00-04) for your files.
With regard to the KFC/Taco Bell Rebuild (RP 00-17), I received a copy of your
correspondence to the applicant and agree completely with your comments. I
was wondering if we wanted to request pedestrian-friendly street furniture or
other amenities in the landscaped front yard setback - just a thought. As far as
environmental review, I think this could qualify as a Prior Environmental
Compliance, which I can prepare as soon as the project issues are resolved.
There are a couple of projects that I need to meet with you about or review the
project file. We received two planchecks that involve Redevelopment Permits,
namely the Pacific Bell wireless antenna at 3001 Carisbad Blvd. and the Army
and Navy Academy's shooting range facility. I also need to review the ANA files
and chat with you about parking, etc. Please let me know when a good time to
meet would be and I'll adjust my schedule accordingly. Thanks a lot.
MICHAEL GRI
Attachments
c: Chris DeCerbo
Kathleen Caso
A&S ENGINEERING INC.
PUNNING • ENGINEERING • CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
207 W. AL^EDA AVE.. STL 203»BURB»WK. CA 91502•PHONE 818-842-3644• FAX 818-842-3760-
Friday, January 12, 2001
RECEIVED
Carlsbad Redevelopment
2965 Roosevelt St. JAhj 200'
#B
Carlsbad CA 92008-2389 HOUSING&R&1,^MENT
Attn: Lori Rosenstein DEPARTMENT
Re: KFC/Taco Bell, 745 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Dear Ms Rosenstein,
Please find enclosed the revised plans for the new KFC/Taco Bell Restaurant.
As you requested in your letter dated 12/14/00 the following revisions have
been made:
Housing and Redevelopment:
1)
a) The proposed 6" high concrete planter curbs and existing 4'-6" high
concrete block wall are identified on sheet Cl.
b) See drawing no. 00-882 sheets 1 thru 12.
c) Revised.
2) See sheet A4 for the revised building elevations. The design complies
with the Village Design Guidelines.
Engineering:
1) See sheet C2 for drainage patterns, slopes, and grades. See sheet Cl for
locations of three proposed fossil filters. It is impracticable to provide
runoff calculations at the preliminary review stage. Since the project will
be conditioned, we will address this issue in greater detail.
2) See sheet Cl for locations of the two easements.
3)
a) The trash enclosure on sheet C1 was taken from city standard #GS-
16. I have enclosed the city standard for your reference. Per my
conversation with the waste management company a recycling bin is
not required.
b) According to records on Jan. 5*^, 2001, there were 589 transactions
for the day, and the highest peak hour was 83 transactions. The new
KFC/Taco Bell restaurant will operate the same as the existing
KFC/Taco Bell.
c) See sheet C1.
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
December 14, 2000
DOUG MASSARO
A&S ENGINEERING
207 W. ALAMEDA AVE.
SUITE 203
BURBANK, CA 91502
Re: KFC/TACO BELL REBUILD - 745 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE
The items requested from you earlier to make your Major Redevelopment Permit (application
no. RPOO-17) and Coastal Development Permit (application no. CDPOO-51) complete have
been received and reviewed by the Housing and Redevelopment Department. It has been
determined that the applications are 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 applications are 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 applications that you clarify, amplify, correct, or otherwise,
supplement the basic information required for the application.
Following the second project review, staff has prepared a list of issues of concern that must be
addressed before the project is scheduled for a public hearing. This list is attached for your
review. Please address all issues of concern and submit 5 sets of revised plans to the Housing
and Redevelopment Department for further processing.
Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813, if you have any questions or wish to set up a
meeting to discuss the applications.
Sincerel
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
C: David Rick, Engineering Department
Mike Grim, Planning Department
Pat Kelley, Building Department
Mike Smith, Fire Department
Larry Black, Landscape Plancheck
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 @
ISSUES OF CONCERN
No. RP 00-17/CDP 00-51
The following Departments have completed their review of the subject project for issues of
concern. The following issues need to be resolved prior to resubmittal:
Housing & Redevelopment:
1. The following information was not addressed after the first plan review:
a. On the site plan, please indicate the height and materials of walls surrounding planters.
b. Provide sign elevations showing type and dimensions of all proposed signs.
c. The building elevations include a reference to trims to match existing "shopping center",
but the site consists of a single occupant. Please revise.
2. In our last letter to you, dated October 13, 2000, the Housing and Redevelopment
Department expressed concern over the architectural design of the project. More
specifically, staff found the architectural design to be inconsistent with the Village Design
Guidelines. Staff suggested more attention should be given to overall roof form (i.e.
replacing the flat roof with a minimum 5:12 roof pitch, designing visual interest into all sides
of the building, providing projections and recesses into the building fagade, and utilizing
applied surface ornamentation and other detail elements for visual interest. In addition,
please note all roof equipment must be architecturally integrated into the overall roof form.
Upon second review of the "revised" plans staff found minimal changes to the building
design. In fact, the only change appeared to be a reduction in the roof pitch of the tower
element of the KFC portion of the structure from 8:12 to 5:12. Staff remains dissatisfied
with the project design and suggests a comprehensive revision to the building design to
create the "Village character" outlined in the Village Design Guidelines sent to you
previously. As stated in our preliminary review meetings, the Housing & Redevelopment
Commission's approval of the project hinges on a superior building design.
Engineering:
Engineering issues that need to be resolved or adequately addressed prior to staff making a
determination on the proposed project are as follows:
1. Show drainage patterns with arrows and slope grades. The minimum grade permissible is
1% for A.C. and 0.5% for P.C.C. surfaces. Using "best management practices" surface
drainage within the parking lot and drive-thru must be filtered to collect pollutants. Show
how filtration will be provided. Using vegetated swales is one method to consider. An
oil/water separator is another. In addition, per the City's Storm Water Management
Ordinance which was established to implement the California Regional Water Quality
Control Board NPDES Permit, the post development runoff quantities and velocity cannot
exceed the predevelopment runoff quantities and velocities. Provide calculations that show
that the post development runoff does not increase and if necessary, redesign to reduce the
net increase to zero. Although the specifications for determining this measurement are
currently in discussion, the current guideline is to use the 10-year, 6-hour duration storm.
This duration, however, may be subject to change as the NPDES Permit is currently being
updated. Although these issues need to be addressed now, the project will be conditioned
to require a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to address these issues in
greater detail.
2. Identify on the site plan the easements described under item 3 and 5 of the preliminary title
report.
3. On the site plan:
a. Draw the trash receptacle to be consistent with the receptacle shown on the landscape
plan. The receptacle shown on the landscape plan is designed to City standard.
b. Provide the Average Daily Trips and highest peak hour generations in accordance with
SANDAG projected rates. Based on a generation rate of 650 vehicles per 1,000 square
feet of building, the project will generate 2,078 vehicles per day and 145 vehicles at the
peak hour.
c. Show all proposed water service lines, meters, backflow devices for any required fire
sprinkler systems and sewer laterals.
d. Show striping (lane dividers, cross walks, etc.) on street frontage. Also, show the raised
median's transition for a left turn lane just opposite the alley approach on Carisbad
Village Dr.
e. Orientate the "drive-thru" sign to face west for approaching drivers. Is there a particular
reason why it is facing south?
f. Add yellow-hatched striping with a sign or pavement lettering stating no parking within
the back-up space for delivery trucks.
g. Label the radius of the dedication as 20 feet.
h. Show the existing trash receptacle on the neighbor's property located next to the
proposed receptacle.
Landscape Plancheck:
The City's Landscape Plancheck Consultant has completed the initial review of the Preliminary
Landscape Plan. Corrections and suggestions have been included on Sheets L-1 and L-2. A
red-lined check print set containing staff's comments is enclosed for your use. Please make
the required changes to the Landscape Plan and resubmit the revised plans to the Housing and
Redevelopment Department for further review. The enclosed red-lined check print set must be
returned with the modified plans to assist staff in its continued review of the proiect.
Memorandum
TO: Lori Rosenstein - Housing and Redevelopment
FROM: David Rick - Assistant Engineer
DATE: December 12, 2000
RP00-17 KFC/Taco Bell Rebuild
COMPLETNESS AND ISSUES REVIEW
Engineering Department staff has completed a review of the above-referenced project
for completeness and engineering issues of concern. All items needed for engineering
review are provided for determining the application as complete. Engineering issues
which need to be resolved or adequately addressed prior to staff making a
determination on the proposed project are as follows:
1. Show drainage patterns with arrows and slope grades. The minimum grade
permissible is 1% for A.C. and 0.5% for P.C.C. surfaces. Using "best
management practices" surface drainage within the parking lot and drive-thru
must be filtered to collect pollutants. Show how filtration will be provided. Using
vegetated swales is one method to consider. An oil/water separator is another.
In addition, per the City's Storm Water Management Ordinance which was
established to implement the California Regional Water Quality Control Board
NPDES Permit, the post development runoff quantities and velocity cannot
exceed the predevelopment runoff quantities and velocities. Provide calculations
that show that the post development runoff does not increase and if necessary,
redesign to reduce the net increase to zero. Although the specifications for
determining this measurement are currently in discussion, the current guideline
is to use the 10-year, 6-hour duration storm. This duration, however, may be
subject to change as the NPDES Permit is currently being updated. Although
these issues need to be addressed now, the project will be conditioned to require
a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to address these issues in
greater detail.
2. Identify on the site plan the easements described under item 3 and 5 of the
preliminary title report.
3. On the site plan:
a. Draw the trash receptacle to be consistent with the receptacle shown on
the landscape plan. The receptacle shown on the landscape plan is
designed to City standard.
b. Provide the Average Daily Trips and highest peak hour generations in
accordance with SANDAG projected rates. Based on a generation rate of
650 vehicles per 1,000 square feet of building, the project will generate
2,078 vehicles per day and 145 vehicles at the peak hour.
c. Show all proposed water service lines, meters, backflow devices for any
required fire sprinkler systems and sewer laterals.
d. Show striping (lane dividers, cross walks, etc.) on street frontage. Also,
show the raised median's transition for a left turn lane just opposite the
alley approach on Carisbad Village Dr.
e. Orientate the "drive-thru" sign to face west for approaching drivers. Is
there a particular reason why it is facing south?
f. Add yellow hatched striping with a sign or paveriient lettering stating no
parking within the back-up space for delivery trucks.
g. Label the radius of the dedication as 20 feet.
h. Show the existing trash receptacle on the neighbor's property located next
to the proposed receptacle.
If you or the applicant has any questions, please either see or contact me at 602-2781
DAVID RICK
Assistant Engineer
Engineering Development Sen/ices Division
A&S ENGINEERING INC.
PLANNING • ENGINEERING • CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
207 W. ALAMEDA ML. STE 203»BURBAWK. CA 91502•PHONE 818-842-3644• FAX 818-842-3760
Transmittal
Date: Tuesday, November 14, 2000
To: Carlsbad Redevelopment
2965 Roosevelt St.
#B
Carfsbad CA 92008-2389
Attn: Lon Rosenstein
RECEIVED
NOV 15 2000
CITY0F0ARL8lte,^,,
From: Doug Massaro
Via: CA overnight
Site location: KFC/Taco Bell, 745 Carfsbad Village Dr.
Attached:
• 10 sets of blueprints
• sign program, 3 sets
• redlined markups
Please find enclosed the plans for 745 Carlsbad Village Dr. Please replace
ttie plans we submitted on Nov. 6^^ with the enclosed plans. If you have any
questions, please call me at 818-842-3644.
A & S ENGINEERING INC.
my PUNNING • ENGINEERING • CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
207 W. ALAMEDA ML, STL 203»BURBAWK. CA 91502* PHONE 818-842-3644 • FAX 818-842-3760
Monday, November 06, 2000 mr pgQf |ygQ
Carfsbad Redevelopment ^
2965 Roosevelt St. NOV i ^> 2000
CITY Of' CAHLSBAD
Carlsbad CA 92008-2389 MSEN^*^
Attn: Lori Rosenstein
Re: written narrative regarding architectural design for KFC/Taco Bell, 745
Carfsbad Village Dr.
Dear Ms Rosenstein,
The proposed architectural design of the new restaurant located at 745
Carlsbad Village Dr. is intended to comply with the City's Design Guidelines.
The following architectural elements noted on the building elevations comply
with the guidelines:
• mission tile roof
• roof pitch
• stucco finish
• trellis
• architectural overhang and column features
• rafter tails
Please refer to the enclosed architectural building elevations for illustration.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at
818-842-3644.
Sincerely,
Doug Massaro
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
October 19, 2000
DOUG MASSARO
A&S ENGINEERING
207 W. ALAMEDA AVE.
SUITE 203
BURBANK, CA 91502
Re: KFC/TACO BELL REBUILD - 745 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE
Dear Doug:
This is a follow-up to my last letter dated October 13, 2000. The following
recommendations are the result of subsequent staff discussions on the proposed site
design with the purpose of facilitating improved on-site circulation and should be
incorporated into the revised plan submittal:
1. Designate the area where the trash receptacle is being relocated from as a back up
space for delivery trucks.
2. Add pavement striping to delineate the drive thru from the parking lot circulation.
At the driveway entrance, delineate the portions of the driveway for "in" and "out"
traffic. Provide a minimum 12 foot wide lane for the drive thru and 12 foot wide
lanes each for the "in" and "out" lanes.
To help illustrate these recommendations, a red-lined check print set has been enclosed for
your use. Please make the required changes and resubmit the revised plans to the Housing
and Redevelopment Department for further review. The enclosed red-lined check print set
must be returned with the modified plans to assist staff in its continued review of the
proiect.
Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813, if you have any questions or wish to set up a
meeting to discuss this project.
Sincerel
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
C: David Rick, Engineering Department
Mike Grim, Planning Department
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 ^
RECEIVED
OCT 16 2000
-» «- 1 . CrtY OF CARLSBAD
Memorandum """^'^fr^^^^
TO: Lori H. Rosenstein, Housing and Redevelopment
FROM: David Rick, Public Works, Development Services Division
DATE: October 16, 2000
RP 00-17: TACO BELL/KFC REBUILD
COMPLETENESS & ISSUES REVIEW
Engineering Department staff has completed a review of the above-referenced project for
application completeness. The application and plans submitted for this proposed project are
currently incomplete and unsuitable for further review due to the following incomplete
items:
1. A preliminary grading/drainage plan (This information may be included as part of your
site plan). Provide grading quantities, spot elevations and slope grades.
2. Preliminary Title Report current within the last six months.
3. Preliminary Landscape Plan. Plans will be checked to confirm that all proposed
landscaping does not interfere with vehicular site distance.
The following issues need to be resolved prior to resubmittal:
4. The site must comply with the City's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Permit.
The purpose of the Permit is to limit the amount of surface pollutants (i.e. hydrocarbons
from motor oil, break dust, etc.) entering the City's drainage system. Provide "Best
Management Practices" which may include installing approved filters in drain inlets or
using vegetated swales at the point of discharge into the public street or alley.
5. On the site plan:
a. Show any pedestrian ramps that exist.
b. Provide the Average Daily Trips and highest peak hour generations in
accordance to SANDAG projected rates.
c. Provide assessors parcel number, legal description and owner's name address
and phone number.
d. Properiy illustrate the top of curb to driveway height transition at the driveway
entrance on Madison Street. In addition, the distance between an extension of
the side property line to the beginning of this transition must be 3 feet and the
transition wiclth itself must be 3 feet.
e. Show existing structures and facilities within 50 feet of the subject property.
Illustrate with lighter lines.
f. Indicate if the wall along the south property line is existing or proposed. Also
indicate the type of wall and height.
g. Show all existing and proposed water and sewer mains, service lines and laterals
along the project frontage. Also show location of meters, cleanouts and other
utilities such as fire hydrants.
h. Show striping and raised medians along the project's street frontage up to the
street centeriine (see DWG 291-2 on file at the City for details).
i. Provide cross sections of the street frontages.
j. Place approximately 5 foot radius returns where the drive-thru connects with the
alley. Also, add a "do not enter" and or "exit only" sign at the end of the
drivethru.
6. Dedication of a portion of the property will be required at the street corner using a
property line radius of 20 feet. Show this proposed dedication with a note. The
proposed monument sign at this corner will need to be repositioned outside this
easement. By placing the sign further south by 2 feet, no conflict will occur with the
easement and in addition, we can be assured that the sign will not interfere with
vehicular site distance.
7. Provide a plan showing existing conditions.
8. The trash receptacle needs to be placed such that trash trucks can circulate on the site
without backing onto either Madison Street or Carisbad Village Drive. One possible
solution is to relocate the receptacle to the southeast corner of the property so that
pickup can occur in the alley
Attached is a redlined plan to aid the applicant in making revisions. Please inform the applicant
to submit this plan to the Redevelopment Department with their next submittal. If you or the
applicant has any questions, please either see or contact me at extension 2781.
DAVID RICK
Assistant Engineer
Development Services Division
C: Senior Engineer - Development Services Division
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
October 13, 2000
DOUG MASSARO
A&S ENGINEERING
207 W. ALAMEDA AVE.
SUITE 203
BURBANK, CA 91502
Re: KFC/TACO BELL REBUILD - 745 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE
Thank you for applying for a Land Use Permit in the City of Carlsbad. The Housing and
Redevelopment Department, together with other appropriate City departments, has
reviewed your Major Redevelopment Permit (application no. RPOO-17) and Coastal
Development Permit {application no. CDPOO-51) as to their completeness for processing.
The applications are incomplete as submitted. Attached are two lists. The first list is
information that must be submitted to complete your applications. This list of items must be
submitted directly to the Redevelopment Office. All list items must be submitted
simultaneously and a copy of this list must be included with your submittal. No
processing of your application can occur until the applications are determined to be complete.
The second list represents issues of concern to staff. When all required materials are
submitted to the Redevelopment Office, the City has an additional thirty (30) days to make a
determination of completeness. If the applications are determined to be complete, processing
for a decision on the applications will be initiated. In addition, please note that you have six
months from the date the applications were initially filed, September 15, 2000, to either
resubmit the applications or submit the required information. Failure to resubmit the
applications or to submit the materials necessary to determine your applications complete shall
be deemed to constitute withdrawal of the application. If the applications are withdrawn or
deemed withdrawn, new applications will be required.
Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813, if you have any questions or wish to set up a
meeting to discuss the applications.
Since
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
C: David Rick, Engineering Department
Mike Grim, Planning Department
Pat Kelley, Building Department
Mike Smith, Fire Department
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 @
LIST OF ITEMS NEEDED
TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION
No. RP 00-17/CDP 00-51
The following Departments have completed their review of the subject project for
application completeness. The application and plans submitted for this project are
incomplete and unsuitable for further review due to the following missing or incomplete
items:
Housing & Redevelopment:
1. Please provide the following information on the site plan:
a. Property owner's name, address, and telephone number.
b. Project name, application types submitted, and application numbers (i.e. KFC/Taco
Bell Rebuild, Major Redevelopment Permit and Coastal Development Permit, RPOO-
17/CDP00-51).
c. Name of sewer, water, and school districts providing service to the project.
d. Add to the Summary Table the following information:
(1) Assessor parcel number(s);
(2) Existing zone and land use (VR - drive-thru restaurant);
(3) Proposed land use (reconstruction of drive-thru restaurant);
(4) Total building coverage;
(5) Building square footage;
(6) Percent landscaping; and
(7) Number of parking spaces required.
e. Building setback from south and west property lines.
f. Height and materials of walls surrounding planters.
g. Revise parking space dimensions. Parking spaces must measure 170 square feet
with a minimum width of 8'-6".
2. Provide a Water Conservation Plan per the City of Carfsbad Landscape Manual.
3. Provide the following information on the floor plan and building elevations:
a. Include a scale on the floor plan.
b. Show overall height on aH building elevations.
4. Provide sign elevations showing type and dimensions of all proposed signs.
Engineering:
1. Provide a preliminary grading/drainage plan (This information may be included as part of
your site plan). Provide grading quantities, spot elevations and slope grades.
2. Preliminary Title Report current within the last six months.
3. Preliminary Landscape Plan. Plans will be checked to confirm that all proposed
landscaping does not interfere with vehicular site distance.
ISSUES OF CONCERN
No. RP 00-17/CDP 00-51
The following Departments have completed their review of the subject project for issues of
concern. The following issues need to be resolved prior to resubmittal:
Housing 8i Redevelopment:
1. The preliminary landscape plan was received on October 11, 2000. There has not been
adequate time for staff to review the landscape plan prior to preparation of these
comments. Please submit a copy of the landscape plan with each set of revised plans.
2. The building elevations include a reference to trims to match existing "shopping
center", but the site has a single occupant. Please revise.
3. Overall, the architectural design of the project is inconsistent with the Village Design
Guidelines. More attention should be given to overall roof form, designing visual
interest into all sides of the building, providing projections and recesses into the building
facade, and utilizing applied surface ornamentation and other detail elements for visual
interest. Please note, a minimum 5:12 roof pitch is a regulatory requirement and gable
roofs with a slope of 7:12 or greater is strongly encouraged as a design guideline. Roof
form is a key design element that ties in both commercial and residential properties
within the Redevelopment Area. A copy of the Village Design Guidelines is being
provided with this letter. Please include a written narrative with the revised plans
indicating how the architectural design incorporates the various elements of the Design
Guidelines.
Engineering:
1. The site must comply with the City's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Permit.
The purpose of the Permit is to limit the amount of surface pollutants (i.e. hydrocarbons
from motor oil, break dust, etc.) entering the City's drainage system. Provide "Best
Management Practices" which may include installing approved filters in drain inlets or
using vegetated swales at the point of discharge into the public street or alley.
2. On the site plan:
a. Show any pedestrian ramps that exist.
b. Provide legal description.
c. Provide the Average Daily Trips and highest peak hour generations in accordance
with SANDAG projected rates.
d. Properly illustrate the top of curb to driveway height transition at the driveway
entrance on Madison Street. In addition, the distance between an extension of the
side property line to the beginning of this transition must be 3 feet and the transition
width itself must be 3 feet.
e. Show existing structures and facilities within 50 feet of the subject property.
Illustrate with lighter lines.
f. Indicate if the wall along the south property line is existing or proposed. Also
indicate the type of wall and height.
g. Show all existing and proposed water and sewer mains, service lines and laterals
along the project frontage. Also show location of meters, cleanouts and other
utilities such as fire hydrants.
h. Show striping and raised medians along the project's street frontage up to the street
centeriine (see DWG 291-2 on file at the City for details).
i. Provide cross sections of the street frontages.
j. Place approximately 5 foot radius returns where the drive-thru connects with the
alley. Also, add a "do not enter" and or "exit only" sign at the end of the drivethru.
3. Dedication of a portion of the property will be required at the street corner using a
property line radius of 20 feet. Show this proposed dedication with a note. The
proposed monument sign at this corner will need to be repositioned outside this
easement. By placing the sign further south by 2 feet, no conflict will occur with the
easement and in addition, we can be assured that the sign will not interfere with
vehicular site distance.
4. Provide a plan showing existing conditions.
5. The trash receptacle needs to be placed such that trash trucks can circulate on the site
without backing onto either Madison Street or Carfsbad Village Drive. One possible
solution is to relocate the receptacle to the southeast corner of the property so that
pickup can occur in the alley.
A red-lined check print set containing Engineering staff's comments is enclosed for your
use. Please make the required changes and resubmit the revised plans to the Housing and
Redevelopment Department for further review. The enclosed red-lined check print set must
be returned with the modified plans to assist staff in its continued review of the proiect.
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
October 5, 2000
DOUG MASSARO
A&S ENGINEERING
207 W. ALAMEDA AVE.
SUITE 203
BURBANK, CA 91502
Re: KFC/TACO BELL REBUILD - 745 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE
I have enclosed receipts showing payment of $3,730.00 for the Major
Redevelopment Permit and Coastal Development Permit applications submitted
for the KFC/Taco Bell Rebuild. The application numbers for the project are
RPOO-17 and CDPOO-51.
City staff is currently reviewing the applications and within the next two weeks
you will receive written correspondence identifying any additional information
needed to complete the applications, issues of concern, or staffs determination
on your proposal. If you have any questions regarding the applications, please
contact my office at 760-434-2813.
Sincerely,
CITY OFCARLSBAD
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
Enclosures
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (619) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (619) 720-2037 ®
RECEIVED
JUN 07 2000
CITY OF CARLSBAD HOUSING &RggJELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE
June 6, 2000
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: . City Attorney
KENTUCKY FRIED CHICKEN ON CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE
The Kentucky Fried Chicken Fast Food Restaurant located on Carisbad Village
Drive is proposing to completely demolish their building and reconstruct the
building on the existing site with a reconfiguration that would provide more
frontage on Carisbad Village Drive, while maintaining the existing drive-thru. In
light of the current prohibition on drive-thru restaurants, staff has requested our
advice as to whether the drive thru feature can now be terminated.
The prohibition on drive-thru restaurants as adopted by Council on January 6,
1998, included an exclusion in Section 21.04.010 which reads:
"Drive-thru restaurants that are either existing or have received final
approvals on the effective date of this ordinance are allowed to
continue in existence subject to the terms and conditions of this Code
and the conditional use permit or other discretionary permit permitting
them and may apply for and be granted CUP extensions under this
Code."
Section 21.35.020 was also amended, and incorporated the Redevelopment
Plan and Village Master Plan and Design Manual by reference into the Municipal
Code.
The Village Redevelopment Master Plan designates the Kentucky Fried Chicken
site, which had an existing drive-thru at the time the prohibition was adopted, as
District One. Section 2, page 57 of that Plan allows a large (gross floor area of
1000 square feet or more and more than 50 seats) fast food restaurant, without a
drive-thru, provisionally in District One.
Nonconforming uses in the Village are not distinguished by nonconforming use
or nonconforming building, as they are in the Municipal Code, but are merely
designated as uses which are "not permitted by right, have not been
provisionally approved, or are prohibited". Furthermore, the Village
Redevelopment Plan provides that "no action to initiate immediate, or time-
I
specific abatement of nonconforming uses within the Village Redevelopment
Area will be taken. The nonconforming use will be allowed to remain unless it
ceases to exist, is abandoned for six months or longer, or until there is a
proposed change in use.
The applicable provision in this case is the prohibition on extension or
intensification of nonconforming uses found on page 79 of the Village Plan.
Unless there is an expansion or intensification of a nonconforming use, any
proposed structural alteration including "incidental reconstruction" is allowed so
long as it conforms to the current development standards. Therefore, the
question for analysis in the case of Kentucky Fried Chicken's proposed
wholesale reconstruction of its facility is whether or not it involves an expansion
or intensification of use.
Since the Kentucky Fried Chicken site itself is not being enlarged, and since
there appears to be no addition of drive-thru windows or additional alternate
circulation routes providing access to a second drive-thru window, there does not
appear to be any expansion or intensification of use. Even assuming that the
building size were increased that would not necessarily expand the drive-thru
capacity of the restaurant. Moreover, following an analysis similar to that set
forth in the municipal code, the building itself is not nonconforming, since it is
entirely allowable and functional even under the existing code, assuming that the
drive-thru window were not operated. The drive-thru component of the facility is
really on the undeveloped portion ofthe parcel.
Therefore, it is my conclusion that Kentucky Fried Chicken should be allowed to
entirely demolish and rebuild their restaurant on the existing site since there is no
showing that this would increase the degree of nonconformity of the drive-thm
use, nor increase the degree or size of that nonconforming use, as would be the
case, for instance, if the building were relocated to the center of the lot and a
drive-thru window were placed on either side of the building allowing drive-thm
access to be doubled and consequently intensified.
JANE MOBALDI
Assistant City Attorney
afs
c: Housing and Redevelopment Director
Community Development Director
Planning Director
City Attorney