HomeMy WebLinkAboutRP 01-09; Carlsbad Village Self Storage; Redevelopment Permits (RP) (2)Jun 25 03 02:53p Group 949 ^9 1778 p.l
Valli (c/zslo-b
Architectural iBivierka-
Group -Y^.^ ^^^^^
June 25, 2003
Lori Rosenstein
City of Carlsbad
Housing and Rodevelopment
2965 Roosevelt Street. Suite B
Carlsbad. CA 92008
Re: Carlsbad Village Self Storage
Carisbad, CA
Dear Ms. Rosenstein;
Thank you for researching my question regarding the side property line fences.
To restate our conversation and messages:
1 The front street side fences must be 6' high wrought iron fences and/or gates.
2 The side and rear property line fences may be chain link. 6' high fences.
Again thank you for your time to review this. If you do not feel that I have stated the
situation correctly, please correct the verbiage and send it back to me.
If you have any questions please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
Valli Architectural Group
Beverley Rutherford [y
Project Aijphitect
cc: Rick Hanson
Bill Mahlstadt, Pacific Construction Group
81 Columbia • Suite200 • Aliso Viejo • CA - 92656 • Tel: 949/349-1777 • Fax: 949 /349-1778
beverleV(@vaHiarch.COm N:\00-68<AC«r»spon(lenoe\RoaiHi»tein062503,«pd
^ HNB, Inc. •
A Development, Investment and Commercial Brokerage Group
29095 Rocky Point Way ~ Escondido, CA 92026
Phone 760-751-2017 ~ Fax 760-751-2019 ~ E-mail rschmitt@nctimes.net
Editor
North Coimty Times
207 E. Pennsylvania Avenue
Escondido, CA 92025
RE: Carlsbad Village Self-Storage Approvals
Dear Editor:
As in most things in life there are two sides to every issue.
Is the City of Carlsbad a push over for "developers"? Certainly not! Did the City council
on January 22, 2002 duly consider a project on its merits; judge the project by the cities
detailed criteria and act in a fair and reasonable marmer? Absolutely yes!
We would like to thank all of the Carlsbad City council members for their long term
commitment to the Carlsbad Village. In addition we would like to commend the council
and the many civic minded citizens for their foresight and hard work in developing the
Village Redevelopment Master Plan. This master plan is the instrument used to consider
any project proposed for the Village Redevelopment area. Carlsbad Village Self Storage
will be a fine project and a significant economic investment for the entire Village.
Robert J. Schmitt (Developer)
President, HNB, Inc.
FEBRUARY 5. 2002
TO: CITY MANAGER
FROM: Management Analyst, Redevelopment
Carlsbad Village Self Storage - Letter to the Editor
Robert Schmitt, applicant for the Carlsbad Village Self Storage project, submitted
the attached "Letter to the Editor" to the North County Times last week. To date,
it has not been published. However, Mr. Schmitt asked that a copy of his letter
be distributed to the City Council.
If you^^^^^^^uestions, please contact me at x2813.
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
:2-02 : 18 "609295860
January 22, 2002
Carlsbad City Council
City of Carlsbad
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, Ca 92008
Dear Carlsbad City Council Members:
I am one of the founding owners and President of Oceanside Glasstile
Company. Our Company owns the property known as 3251-3281
Tyler Street in Carlsbad. This is one of two parcels that Is part of the
Carlsbad Village Self Storage development proposal submitted by
Robert Schmidt of HNB, Inc.
We made a conscious decision to move to Carlsbad in 1994 from
Oceanside because of our admiration for the City. During the past
eight years, we have been a supportive and growing Carlsbad
business. Our core product is decorative glass tiles made from
recycled bottles. Our Company employee base has grown from 6
empioyees to 145 over the past 5 years. The majority of our
employees are residents of Carlsbad.
We purchased the Tyler Street property in 1999 (which was adjacent
to the our leased facility (3235 Tyler Street) originally with the
intention of expanding our manufacturing business. In the first part of
2000, an opportunity arose that allowed us to relocate our facility
within the City of Carlsbad (an important point In our relocation
efforts); a 48,000 square foot facility that better met the needs of our
Company's growth plans. This became a reality when Mr. Schmidt
made an offer to purchase our parcel for the development of his Self
Storage project. We entered into this transaction last February with
the knowledge that his proposal was viable, supported by the
Redevelopment Agency, and a permitted use.
If this project is rejected by City Council tonight, it poses a problem for
all property owners on Tyler Street. As this project adheres to the
guidelines of permitted use in the Master Plan, a denial of this permit
would then cast doubts on the consistency of how the Master Plan is
implemented. In light of the fact that both the Redevelopment agency
and the Design Review Board have unanimously approved this project.
2293 Cosmos Court
rrn a
760.929.
-22-02; 18: 13 ; ^609295860
and the fact that HNB has cooperated with significant design mandates
from these bodies, rejection of this project compromises potential
business development. The end result would be an extremely
unfavorable precedent for future improvement in this district.
Today's City Council meeting and vote on this project greatly impacts
our financial concerns and interests. Future uses and marketing plans
for this parcel, ifthe Self Storage project is rejected, would be
questionable at best.
Thank you in advance for y^ur consideration of this project, my
concerns, and the greaterxpncern for the City of Carlsbad.
M.
President
JPlN-22-2002 14 = 09 CITY OF CPRLSBAD 760 720 9461 P.02/06
TO: The CHy of Carlsbad January 15. .2002
Mayor. Council^nd Manager
1600 Carisbad Village Drive
Garlsbad, CA 92008
From: Ofelia Escobedo y n
Lola's Market AGENDA UEW n rf^ oL^
3292 Roosevelt St.
Garlsbad. CA 92008 « Wayoii
ClZy Col J
Re: Rp 01 -09 "Carlsbad Village Self-Storage" ManizL-sr
Council agenda. January 22.2002 oertT^^
Dear CHy Leaders:
Please allow this letter to serve as the concemed voice, representing a
significant number of Carlsbad residents and voters.
You are aware of my long standing Interest in issues that concem Carlsbad as
a community. That Interest Has been described by some people as being
limited to the area of Carlsbad, knbwn as "The Barrio" ("The iveighborhood"),
i believe that my community Interest actually concems the greater 'good' of
Carlsbad and concems an of the people of Carlsbad.
"mat Is good for me Barrio Is good for Canstsaar
With the understanding and belief that thl$ Is a true statement, accept that
the Issue of a 5-story building m our smaH neigliborhood Is an ^ssue that
concerns all of the residents of Carlsbad. Also, accept that my voice Is
spealclngfor many Carlsbad residents who Hve fn various parts of our city
Inside and outside i)f "The Barrio".
We object to the sudden placement of a very large, very commercial and
exclusively non-resldentlal structure Into our very small, very established and
very fragile neighboriiood.
JflN-22-2002 14=09 CITY OF CARLSBAD 760 720 9461 P.03/06
Our feeling atthls^tlme. Is^that if this structure is allowed to be built-in. spite
Of our <Hsapprovai. v^th the several exc^p^s to and variances fromtiie
building and planning code restrictions previously Imposed liy the cH^s
leaders, then a critical violation of the respect and trust that we have long
shared with the Jeaders of .Cansbad. iiasi}een .commH:ted.
Altbough.Tyier Street Is part of the Village Redevelopment Area and
designated for service commercial support, this street Is clearly an area of
the city that is not consistent with surrounding residential ^zoning nor. nearby
commercial zohlnjg.
The existing industriai uses, such as auto body repair and vitamin
manufacturing, are not the types of uses typically found In small downtown
villages. These are uses that deariy belong In more industrial areas of tbe
city; however, because they have been located at the present sites forfnany
years they have been aUowed to continue to operate and expand.
The question the Councii may want to asic itself is: Does the City of CaHsbad
want to perpetuate these types of land uses with new buildings that wiil
have a life span of 50 years or more? Is this the direction Tyler Street is going
to talce in the future?
Clearly, the best route for the City to talce would be to change the zoning,
and to declare the existing uses "legally non-conforming" uses. This would
allow existing uses to continue, but would also prohibK Incompatible new
uses from being constmcted.
Since that option Js not i>elng considered, the alternative is for theproposed
mini-warehouse to function as a transitional land use. until such time as Tyler
Street redevelops. New uses, including the mini-warehouse, should strive to
develop as Ideal land uses for the area. New uses shouid not seeic the same
mighted Jevel as tbe adjacentDusinesses wHtiout architectural design,
landscapmg and surrounded by chain Hnk, barbed wire, and razor wire
fencing.
The proposed mini-warehouse does provide architectural detailing,
landscaping and Increased setbaclcs similar to nearby residential uses. Ail of
these wilUmprove the .appearance of TyierStreetand exceed the appearance
of other businesses on the street. However, there are several areas where
compatibility with future land uses could be Improved. These include the
following:
JAN-22-2002 14=10 CITY OF CARLSBAD 760 720 9461 P.04/06
Scale of Development
The Design Guidelines state that development shall be "small In scale". Yet,
the structure reaches the maximum allowed height of 35 feet over all of the
building, except for the tower (which extends to 40 feet) and the smaller,
front sections of the building (which drop down to around 25 feet).
The maximum allowed building height of 35 feet should only be allowed when
a 5:12 roof pH:ch Is provided. Because this cannot be provided due to the
nature of the \>\xM\nq, tnenumberpf stories should be reclucea to
A structure this Jarge. at.a height of .35 feet, will create an extremeiy large
building mass, out of scale with nearby residences and existing industrial
buildings. The only structures that are this h^ are the Tyler Street
Apartments and K&K Vitamins (at the rear of the lot). As stated in the staff
report, the proposed building wilt be setting a precedent for future
development oh Tyler Street.
A two-story bliilding would be more in Iceeplng wHih the building heights
south of Cansbad Village Drhfe. A mini-warehouse in the village should not be
allowed to be the same height as one In the industrial panes along Palomar
Airport Road or Interstate S.
signage
The other area where there is a laclc of compatibiiity Is with regard to
signage. The proposed project Includes a monument sign (8* x 3'), a sign on
the tower (17.5* x 3.6') and two signs near the rear of the buildings (15' x 2').
The Redeveiopment Master Plan was approved prior to adoption of the
recent Sign Ordinance Amendment and therefore allows more signage than
will be found elsewhere in the CHy.
When an ordinance allows a maximum, that does not mean that the
maximum Is a "given".
Signage should be In scale to the building and the site.
The signage proposed for this building does neither. The proposed
monument sign Is all the signage that Is required for the Identification of this
building. A large sign on the tower (same sign size as Ralph's Supermarket)
isn't needed at this site, it will not be able to be read by someone driving
along Tyler Street because It wili be too high In the air. And. it Is not
compatible with the nearby residences.
JAN-22-2002 14=11 CITY OF CARLSBAD 760 720 9461 P.05/06
in addH:Ion. signage along the railroad is setting an extremeiy poor precedent
when the CHy is getting ready to develop a pedestrian conidor In the railroad
right-of-way. Do we want present railroad users and future recreattonai
users to be assailed by sign after sign as they travel and recreate in the
transportation corridor?
Signage proposed at the north and south sides at the rear of the buildings Is
cieany intended to advertise to railroad users and not to the Village as
purported. Anyone who has taken the train and expenenced the visual blight
of most railroad conidors would not appreciate the addition of two more
signs, particularly of this size.
Cansbad prides Itself on being of the highest quality, this is not a step In that
direction.
Design Review Board Resolution No. 279
Condition No. 14: This condition Includes an apparent typo permitting
outdoor storage of materiai which is contrary to common City practices and
should be corrected by the Insertion of the word "not".
CondHion No. 18: This condition allows minimum sbc-foot high fencing to be
instailed along the skies and rear of the property wH:h the k>cation and
matenals to be approved by the Housing and Redevelopment Director. This is
contrary to City practice whk:h routinely allows only a maximum height of six
feet This condition should addrass fendng matenals, prohibit the use of
barbed or razor wlra and specify a maximum height pnor to project
approvaL This would provide full dlsclosura to nearby property owners.
Trash Enclosures: Resolution 279 does not Inciude any condHions for trash
enclosures. Minl-warahouses frequently generate a substantial amount of
trash. Enclosures for this type of on-site maintenance should be provided
within the gated area not within the frontyard setback (landscaped areas or
parking areas). No provisions are made for this type of use.
Summary and conclusion:
"The Barno", part of the 'Redevetopment' area of Cansbad. Is an area In
transition, it is thus. dHflcult to plan for this area.
Therefore, does one create compatibility with surrounding, deteriorating
land uses, or does one place the burden on the new developer to comply with
a yet unknown level of devetopment?
JAN-22-2002 14=11 CITY OF CARLSBAD 760 720 9461 P.06/06
This IS, and always has been a difficult task, compromises of positions and
interests always must be made.
In this case, a fair compromise would be to let the proposed land use be
approved"but with the above suggested modifications to building height and
mass, as well as to signage-to create a better Interface with existing and
future land uses.
Thank you for your conslderatton of our position.
Ofelia Escobedo
Cansbad resident and "Barrto" merchant
TOTAL P.06
JAN-15-2002 14=52 CITY OF CARLSBAD 760 720 9461 P.02/02
:ARLSBAD
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
January 14, 2002
Mayor Bud Lewis
Mayor Pro Tem Ann Kulchin
Council Member Julie Nygaard
Council Member Matt Hall
Council Member Ramona Finilla
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
AGENDA ITEM #
Mayor
City CouncU
Cilv Mama^er
In 1996, the Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce supported the creation ofa vision
and plan for the "Barrio" community in Carlsbad. At that time the proposed plan
was not adopted and a revised plan was never brought fon^^ard.
We believe that the controversy over the proposed self-storage facility would
have been avoided if there were an updated plan in place.
The Chamber requests that you use this issue as an opportunity to reconsider
iniplementation of a plan for the area. We hope that the City staff in cooperation
with "Barrio" residents, businesses and property owners would consider revisiting
the vision and plan for their community.
The Chamber would be happy to participate in any such endeavor.
Sincerely,
^^^^
Gary Hfll
Chairman ofthe Board
PKon. (vrn, o^nn^^^/'*'"'* ^"'^"^ • Carlsbad, California 92008 -w^ Phone; (760) 931-8400 - Fax: (760) 931-9153 • E-„,ail: chamber@carlsbad.org • Web: www.«rlsbad.org ^
TOTAL P.02
January 75, 2002
Mayor Claude Lewis and Council (Members
Carlsbad City Hall
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Dear: Honorable Mayor and Council Members
I'm a thirty-year resident and business owner in the "Village" and I would
like to express my unequivocal support for the proposed Carlsbad Village
Self-Storage project. We support the proposed use as good business for
the City of Carlsbad and an excellent permitted use for District 6. I have
reviewed the developers proposed project and believe it will be beautiful
project.
I'm president of Soils Organic Solutions, owner of 3235 Tyler Street; we
have a long history as a landlord on Tyler Street. Oceanside GlassTile was
our most recent tenant and they have relocated to the Carlsbad Business
Park where they have expanded their manufacturing business to a
54,000 sf facility.
I recognize, and hope that the council does also, the positive impact that
Carlsbad Village Self-Storage will have on the Tyler Street area. This
project is the first major financial commitment and redevelopment
proposed for District 6. I believe that it will be a low intensity use, yet
focus development and substantial financial resources on an area that
has not yet benefited from Carlsbad's growth.
Sincerely,
Fikes
President/CEO
HNB, Inc.
A Development, Investment and Commercial Brokerage Group
29095 Rocky Point Way ~ Escondido, CA 92026
Phone 760-751-2017 ~ Fax 760-751-2019 ~ E-mail rschmitt(anctimes.net
January 11,2002
Mayor Claude Lewis and Council Members
Carlsbad City Hall
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Dear: Honorable Mayor and Council Members
As the applicant for a redevelopment major use permit for a self-storage project at 3235-
3281 Tyler Street I thought I would respectfully offer a brief summary of our proposed
project.
In the fall of 2000 we performed our initial market study and determined that based on
the demographic analysis and competition study that there was a market need for a self-
storage project. Our competition serving the west of 1-5 market are as follows:
1. Security Public Storage, 2.1 miles north of subject 1501 S. Coast Highway, Oceanside
2. U-Haul Storage, 2.6 miles north of subject, 802 S. Coast Highway, Oceanside
3. U-Haul Storage, 4 miles south of subject, 6175 Paseo Del Norte, Carlsbad
Based on the amount of square footage of these facilities, age of projects, management of
projects and population bemg served we determmed that we could successfully operate a
facility in the area bounded by the 1-5, Pacific Ocean and the two lagoons.
In addition we determined that the "Carlsbad Village Redevelopment Master Plan"
allowable land uses for District 6 "Light Industrial" permits by right storage
buildings/warehouses. Further the other permitted land uses for district 6 are limited to
the following:
a. Auto painting/detailing
b. Auto repair/services
c. Auto tovraig
d. Parking lot/structiu*es
e. Parks
f Cabinet shops
g. Parcel delivery service
h. Plumbing shop
i. Plumbing shop supply yards
j. Stained glass studios
k. STORAGE BUILDINGSAVAREHOUSES
1. wholesale businesses
3235-3281 Tyler Street
January 11,2002
Page 2
With the determination of market need and storage being a permitted use in District 6 we
have entered into escrow to purchase and develop our proposed project. In addition we
have expended well over two hundred thousand dollars paying for five iterations of
architectural drawings, soils engineering studies, civil engineering studies, environmental
studies, market/demographic studies as well as considerable consultant time. We have in
the past year worked closely vdth staff and we have designed a project that is reminiscent
of a condominium/apartment project. We attempted to follow the design concept of the
Lutheran senior facility on Carlsbad Boulevard and implement it for our use.
We believe that the end result of our working with staff is a hallmark storage project, one
that elicited the followdng comments from the Design Review Board members:
William Compas, Chairperson stated "I'm impressed by the design" and also " I believe
the project would result in less traffic and enlmnce the appearance of the area"
Board Member Heineman stated that he feels that the site is not suitable for many things
because it is adjacent to the railroad but the city is fortimate that the proposed "design is
outstanding and it will enhance the area not detract"
Board Member Lawson stated, "it is a permitted use that is of low intensity", and "is
impressed with what the applicant has prepared"
There have been some concems that were voiced by the some of the members of the
audience at our DRB meeting about 1 .traffic/parking 2.crime 3. Toxic waste and 4. Land
use, which we would like to address.
1. Traffic/Parking: It has been estimated by city engineering staff that the proposed
project will reduce the traffic on Tyler Street by 28% from the past use of glass
tile manufacturing. It was stated by David Rick at the DRB meeting that the
proposed project would have no significant impact on Tyler Street and also that
the previous business generated more traffic and other permitted uses would also
likely generate more traffic and parking issues. In addition staff has stated in the
staff report that the proposed onsite parking satisfies the parking requirement for
the project and is consistent with the parking standards applied to odier self-
storage projects within the city.
2. Crime: Self-Storage by its very nature requires a very secure facility as we
provide storage space for our customers household and business goods. Our state
of the art facility will be professionally managed, fenced, alarmed, gated, coded
access and video monitored 24 hours a day and we will proactiveiy work closely
with the Carlsbad Police Department. We anticipate a well managed and secure
project such as ours will have far less crime than an empty warehouse or a vacant
yard. Our project is a very expensive development, an estimated nine million
dollar investment that we cannot allow to become "an eyesore" or allow to "
detract from the Village image."
3235-3281 Tyler Street
January 11,2002
Page 3
3. Toxic Waste: The subject site has a long history of use as a manufacturing site,
well over 45 years. As responsible business owners we cannot acquire for
development, land that is contaminated. We have thoroughly reviewed the
environmental studies that have been performed by previous owners and those
studies that were performed for our benefit. We have provided staff with full
environmental reports and including a "Phase One" summary report dated Jime
20, 2001 provided by PIC Environmental Services, 742 Genevieve Street, Suite
G, Solana Beach, CA 92075. Phone 858-259-3140, Contact Daniel C. Oliver. We
are including with this letter a letter submitted to the current landowner from the
County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health, Land and Water
Quality Division, Dated August 4,1999 by Chris Gonaver, Chief, Land and Water
Quality Division. The bottom line of the studies and letter from the County is " no
further action is required at this time"
4. Land Use: Carlsbad Village Redevelopment Area District 6 is unique among the 9
districts in the Village. It has a long history of manufacturing and service
businesses. The district has been thoroughly studied and the above-mentioned
uses are the uses the community, business owners and staff concluded were the
most appropriate district uses and are in the prevailing Master Plan.
We have been available to discuss our project by phone or in person throughout our
application process and we again offered at the DRB to meet with any concemed citizen
or group at any time or location to further discuss our project. To date no one has
contacted us and it is our understanding that only one-submittal package has been picked
up at the redevelopment office on Roosevelt for review.
We are available to meet with council prior to the Redevelopment Commission Hearing
should there be any specific questions that might need clarifying.
Thank you for your consideration of our project and we look forward to being a good
business neighbor in the "Village"
Sincerely,
Robert J. S
President
GARYERBECK
DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
LAND AND WATER QUALITY DIVISION
P.O. BOX 129211. SAN OIEGO. CA f2112-92«1
(€11) 338-2222 FAX (CIS) 331.2377
RICHARD HAAS
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
August 4, 1999
Ms. Lebriz Tosuner-Fikes
P.O. Box 517
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Dear Ms. Tosuner-Fikes:
VOLUNTARY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM — DEH FILE NO. H09657-001
3235 TYLER STREET, CARLSBAD, CA
The County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health (DEH) has
completed review of the envirorunental documentation prepared by PIC
Environmental Services (PIC) . With the provision that the information
provided to this agency was accurate and representative of existing
conditions, it is the position of this office that no further action is
requiired at: this time.
Please be advised that this, letter does not relieve you of any liability
under the; California Health and Safety Code or the Porter Cologne Water
Quality Control Act. If previously unidentified contamination is
discovered which may affect public health, safety and/or water quality,
additional site assessment and cleanup may be necessary.
Thank you for your efforts in resolving this matter. Please contact Jim
Schuck of the Land & Water Quality Division, at (619) 338-2908, if you
require additional assistance.
Sincerely,
CHRIS GONAVER, Chief
Land and Water Quality Division
CG:JCS
Enclosure
cc: Regional Water Quality Control Board
Daniel C. Oliver, PIC
'Prevention Comes First*'
"Quality You Can Trust" K&K LAlbRATORlES, INC.
January 10, 2002 RECBVED
City of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Commission
c/o City Clerk
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
JAN 1 4 2002
^ CITYOFCARLSBAD
Case: Carlsbad Village Self Storage
RP 01-09
Dear Mayor Lewis and Members of the Council,
I would like to express on behalf of K & K Laboratories, Inc. and the
Kononchuk family our support for the proposal to build the self storage
facility at 3235-3281 Tyler Street. As owners of the property and
business adjacent to the south side of the proposed project, we would be
more adversely affected by an inappropriate use or development at that
site than most of our neighbors. Having reviewed the plans with Robert
Schmitt, however, I believe that the facility would be appropriate in
both use and design, and would provide a service not readily available
in this part of Carlsbad.
It is good public policy to approve good proposals, in my opinion. It
encourages investment by the sort of businesses that contribute to the
city and its communities. While varying opinions regarding architectural
taste are entitled to a fair hearing, absent a compelling objective
reason to reject it, I believe that the Housing and Redevelopment
Commission should approve the proposal both on its own considerable
merits and as a matter of good governance.
Thank you.
Sincerely
Alex Kononchuk, Jr.
Director of Operations
cc: Lori Rosenstein
3305 TYLER STREET • CARLSBAD, CA 92008 (760) 434-6044
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
January 3, 2002
OFELIA ESCOBEDO
3292 ROOSEVELT STREET
CARLSBAD, CA. 92008
RE:
Dear Ofie:
SELF-STORAGE FACILITY ON TYLER STREET
Thank you for your letter of December 13, 2001 regarding the self-storage facility proposed for Tyler
Street. Your letter to the Mayor and City Council was forwarded to my office for a response. The Mayor
and Council appreciated your comments and will consider them during the public hearing on this item to
be held on January 15, 2002 in the City Council Chambers.
As you know, the Design Review Board did recommend approval of the subject project at their meeting
of November 26, 2001 based on the fact that the use is permitted in the area and complied with the
applicable development standards, with the exception that the project provides for setbacks which exceed
the range and a portion of the roof element does not meet the required 5:12 roof pitch. The Board's
recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council, acting as the Housing and Redevelopment
Commission, for final action.
As you may remember from your participation on the Master Plan Advisory Committee, it was agreed
that industrial uses would continue to be allowed within Land Use District 6 of the Village Area, which is
the location of the proposed storage facility. While the hope was that over time this area might be able to
transition into more of a commercial retail and business area, the industrial uses were permitted by the
Master Plan. Although the use is not preferred, it is staffs hope that this type of project might assist in the
effort to encourage more desirable uses in the area (commercial and mixed use) because this project will
clean-up a very blighted site and provide a land use which has a reduced impact from an industrial and
compatibility standpoint.
It is unfortunate as you stated within your letter that the Barrio Specific Plan was not adopted due to
significant disagreement within the Community. In the draft Barrio Specific Plan, however, the area in
which the proposed project is located was noted as being included within the Village Redevelopment
Area and subject to the applicable regulations as set forth within the Village Master Plan. It is important
to note that the Barrio Specific Plan would not have changed the requirements set forth within the Village
Master Plan for the subject area. The self-storage facility would have continued to be permitted and the
development standards would have remained the same.
You are correct in that the draft Barrio Specific Plan did address lot consolidations and limited them
according to planning areas. The proposed maximum lot sizes ranged from 10,000 to 24,500 square feet
in the residential and residential professional areas. The commercial areas, however, had no maximum lot
size and no discussion within the draft Specific Plan would have limited lot consolidations for
commercial properties. The Village Master Plan does not prohibit or limit lot consolidations.
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 ^
O. Escobedo
January 3,2002
Page 2
In regard to the livable communities concept adopted for residential communities within Carlsbad, you
are probably correct that the proposed project is not consistent with the noted concept. However, it is also
true that the proposed project is located within a commercial/industrial area which has residential in close
proximity. Our goal has been to be sensitive to the residential community while also allowing the
commercial/industrial uses to continue. The livable communities concept encourages pedestrian-friendly
streets with walkways. Although Redevelopment Staff would like for the proposed project to install
sidewalks, the project was not conditioned to do so because the project is located in an area which has
been designated as an "altemative design" street per the "City Street and Sidewalk Policy Committee
Final Report". The subject property owner, however, will ultimately be required to participate with other
property owners in the area to develop a design for Tyler Street for any future street improvements,
including sidewalks. The applicant is willing to install the sidewalks if instructed to do so by the Housing
and Redevelopment Commission. I thought it was interesting to note in the Barrio Specific Plan that the
installation of additional street improvements was not recommended for Tyler Street. The comments in
the draft Barrio Specific Plan indicated that the street was fully improved and does not serve high
volumes of traffic. Therefore, additional improvements were not required. This seems contrary to the
comments made by local residents at the Design Review Board hearing. The proposed project will,
however, enhance landscaping on Tyler Street, which was recommended within the draft Barrio Specific
Plan.
Thank you again for the letter. We do understand that this is a controversial project and is not desired by
you and many other residents within the area. The Housing and Redevelopment Commission will give
serious consideration to your comments as well as those of others attending the public hearing on January
15, 2002. If you have any questions prior to the public hearing, please do not hesitate to contact my office
at (760) 434-2935.
/—Sincerely,
^"IDEBBIE FOUNTAIN
Housing and Redevelopment Director
C: City Manager
City Council
Community Development Director
December 26, 2001 itv
^ory^
TO: CITY MANAGER ^ ^^^forn.
VIA: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR -fXxjU,
FROM: HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR!^^
SELF-STORAGE PROJECT PROPOSED FOR TYLER STREET AND CONSISTENCY WITH
VISION FOR AREA
The following information is provided in response to Ofie Escobedo's letter to the Mayor and City
Council requesting that the Major Redevelopment Permit for the Self-Storage Facility proposed for Tyler
Street be denied by the Housing and Redevelopment Commission.
Self-Storage Proiect
On January 15, 2001, the Housing and Redevelopment Commission will hold a public hearing to consider
an application submitted for a major redevelopment permit to allow for the constmction of a new self-
storage facility on the west side of Tyler Street between Pine Avenue and Walnut. The Design Review
Board reviewed the project on November 26, 2001 and recommended approval of the project. As Ms.
Escobedo stated within her correspondence, the building does consist of two three-story buildings which
provide for 146,637 square feet of storage area (approximately 1100 units of storage) and 1,350 square
feet of office. The proposed project is consistent with the permitted land uses in the area and complies
with the applicable development standards, with the exception that the project provides for setbacks
which exceed the range and a portion of the roof element does not meet the required 5:12 roof pitch.
Therefore, variances will need to be approved for these elements of the project. Attached is a reduced
rendering of the proposed project.
Vision for Area
In 1995, the Housing and Redevelopment Commission adopted the Village Master Plan and Design
Manual. The Master Plan sets forth the goals, objectives, and vision for the nine (9) land use districts
within the Village Area. The proposed project is located within Land Use District 6 of the Village
Redevelopment Area. District 6 has traditionally functioned as a light industrial area with an emphasis on
automotive towing, repair and detailing uses. It should be noted that this industrial area is very small. It
contains approximately 19 parcels which make up about 9 actual lots which have existing industrials uses
operating on them.
As part of the Master Plan development process, it was agreed that the existing industrial uses would be
allowed to continue in the area. While the hope was that over time this area might be able to transition
into more of a commercial retail and business area, the industrial uses are permitted by the Plan. Ms.
Escobedo served on the Master Plan Advisory Committee which met for nearly four (4) years and
recommended this land use strategy. As a result of the adopted land use strategy, Self-Storage facilities
are permitted by right within Land Use District 6 of the Village Redevelopment Area. The development
standards allow the proposed size of the building, including the height.
Although the self-storage facility is not the most exciting land use and staff would prefer a use with more
of a Village character, we do not believe it is realistic to expect that the first new project to be constructed
in this industrial area would be one that requires visibility or foot traffic to survive. Projects in this area
will tend to be more destination-oriented businesses such as the use proposed. Also, many other uses
(such as residential or mixed use) would be incompatible at this time with the existing industrial uses. It is
staffs hope that this project will at least serve as a catalyst for other redevelopment within the area. With
this project, it is more likely that other types of desirable uses (commercial and mixed use) may come into
the area primarily because this project will clean-up a very blighted site and provide a land use which has
a reduced impact from an industiial and compatibility standpoint. Staff believes this is necessary in order
to facilitate the development of the land uses most desired by Ms. Escobedo.
As indicated above, staff was not thrilled with the self-storage use and did, in fact, try to discourage the
applicant. However, because the Master Plan allows this use by right, staff accepted that the applicant had
the right to proceed with his application. Therefore, we worked with the applicant for many months to
obtain the best design possible on the building. We believe that the proposed design is more consistent
with the look of an apartment building rather than an industrial, self-storage facility. We also believe that
the proposed project is better than many of the altemative land uses (auto detailing, towing, etc) that are
permitted within the area.
Barrio Specific Plan and Lot Consolidations
Due to disagreement within the commumty, the Barrio Specific Plan was never adopted and no
altematives have been proposed as Ms. Escobedo indicated within her letter. However, the Village Master
Plan was adopted and has been implemented since 1995. In the draft Barrio Specific Plan, the area in
which the proposed project is located was noted as being included within the Village Redevelopment
Area and subject to the applicable regulations as set forth within the Village Master Plan. Property owners
are required to comply with the adopted land use strategy as well as the goals, policies, programs and
procedures set forth within the Village Master Plan. This would not have changed with adoption of the
Barrio Specific Plan.
The draft Barrio Specific Plan did address lot consolidations and limited them according to planning
areas. The proposed maximum lot sizes ranged from 10,000 to 24,500 square feet in the residential and
residential professional areas. The commercial areas had no maximum lot size and no discussion within
the draft Specific Plan which would have limited lot consolidations. The Village Master Plan does not
prohibit lot consolidations in any of its land use districts. In fact, lot consolidation is typically considered
desirable from a redevelopment standpoint. Many of the properties within the Village Area are too small
for development under existing standards. Therefore, lot consolidation will actually be necessary in many
cases in order to develop desirable projects. For the noted project, two properties will be consolidated
into a single lot approximately 88,400 square feet in size.
Size and Height of Proposed Building
It is true that the proposed building is larger in size and taller than many of the surrounding buildings,
especially the single family homes. However, it is important to note that any new commercial or multi-
family building being constructed within the area will most likely be larger and taller than existing
buildings. The land values have increased substantially over the years. Therefore, to maximize profit, any
new developer/property owner will require larger buildings than those existing in the area at this time. As
an example, the approved Join Hands Youth Facility and the Schilling Mixed Use Project are both larger
and taller than other buildings in the area. These projects were not opposed by the residents in the area.
The proposed project is generally consistent with the development standards permitted for the area.
Although Ms. Escobedo focused on the size of the building in her letter, it is our understanding that Ms.
Escobedo is primarily opposed to the use. She would like a mixed use project or retail project within the
area. From a financial standpoint, these type of projects are not feasible at this time. However, it is also
safe to assume that if these type of projects were built they would be similar in size to the proposed
project.
Livable Communities/Neighborhoods
Ms. Escobedo does not believe that the proposed project fits into the Livable Communities concept
adopted for residential communities within Carlsbad. While it is tme that the project is probably not
consistent with the noted concept, it is also tme that the area in question is not primarily a residential
community. The proposed project is located within a commercial/industrial area which has residential
areas in close proximity. Therefore, the goal has been to be sensitive to the residential community while
also allowing the commercial/industrial uses to continue. The livable neighborhoods concept encourages
pedestrian-friendly streets with walkways. Although Redevelopment Staff would like for the proposed
project to install sidewalks, the project was not conditioned to do so because the project is located in an
area that has been designated as an altemative design street per the "City Street and Sidewalk Policy
Committee Final Report". The applicant has been conditioned to enter into a Neighborhood Improvement
Agreement and not required to install any public improvements at this time. Although this is contrary to
the desires currently being expressed by some residents in the area who would like to see improvements
to the street and especially would like sidewalks installed on Tyler Street, the condition is consistent with
the recent policies established by the City Council as related to sidewalk and street improvements. The
subject property owner will ultimately be required to participate with other property owners in the area to
develop a design for Tyler Street. The process for completing this design process, however, has not yet
been developed. It should be noted that the applicant is willing to install sidewalks along the frontage of
his property if so desired by the City Council/ Housing and Redevelopment Conmiission.
SUMMARY
Although the use is not desired by Ms. Escobedo, staff believes that the proposed project may, in fact,
address many of the concems expressed by residents within the area. The proposed use will not have the
environmental impacts that other permitted industrial uses in the area currently have on existing residents,
such as noise, 24 hour operations, smell and visual blight. In addition, the proposed use has projected
traffic (400 ADT) which is less than the current industrial/manufacturing use (est. 550 ADT). The project
will provide a well-designed building, substantial landscaping which will improve the area and limited
hours of operation (6am to Spm). Ms. Escobedo and many of the residents signing the petition opposing
the project do not believe that the project is consistent with the vision for the area. However, per the
existing Master Plan, the proposed project is, in fact, consistent with the adopted vision. If the
Commission would like for staff to work with the community to develop a new vision for the area, we
would need direction to do so.
Please let me know if you would like any additional information related to the proposed project or Ms.
Escobedo's opposition.
DEBBIE FOUNTAIN
CO
S90O l{
i
111
to
UJ
O
CD
CO
< o
o
<
CO -J o:
<
.4
03
X
Ul
From the Office of THE CITY MANAGER
Date
To CZ^IyVNVV^
D Note and Return
D Please Handle for Me
D Give Recommendation
1^ Investigate and Report
D Please See Me
• For Your Approval
D For Your Information
• Respond Directly/Send
Me Copy
• Prepare Reply for City
Manager's Signature
• Prepare Reply thnj
City Manager for
Submission to Council
• Complete By
----t^S^ci^^ A»AA.
Q^cr>rv
REFERRED TO CITY MANAGER
FOR RESPONSE
date:
OFELIA E. ESCOBEDO
0
3292 R005£V£LT STR££T
CARLSBAD.CA 92006
13 December 2001
Mayor Claude (Bud) Lewis and Council Members ALL RECEIVED
CARLSBAD CITY HALL Referred to
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive City Manager for Response
Carlsbad, Califomia 92008
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
One of the Items on the Council Agenda on Tuesday, December 4*, addressed the
issue of livable communities, where the residents wouid be encouraged to live, work
and play. I believe this is the path that many of the new developments are pursuing.
As you are aware, this was one of the goals the Barrio Cartsbad Association
advocated. However, because of outside influences, all the hard work and effort that
had gone into the Bamo Plan were defeated at the iast moment and for over five years,
we have not hearcl or seen any altemate plan being proposed by the opposition (Old
Carlsbad Association).
One of the main features ofthe Barrio Carisbad Plan had been to discourage lot
gonsolidation in the area, since the North West Quadrant was already saturated with
affordable dpailrrieniii, eicr Now we are faced with another challenge, the building of a
three story, 147,987 sq. ft. self storage unit on Tyler Street (a narrow street, that
already suffers trom traffic congestion). ^
Many local residents, living in dose proximity to the area that will be affected, have
signed a survey. We are all in agreement, that a building of this size and height is not
appropriate for our neighborhood. We have seen the plans, and though the renderings
look beautiful on paper, we feel that in the future it will become an eyesore and detract
from the Village image of livable or smart growth communities. I am enclosing copies
of the survey and hope that you will find it in your hearts to deny this application.
I
Ofelia E. Escobedo
(760)434-2191
Enclosure (7 pages)
WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, PROPERTY OWNERS AND/OR RESIDENTS IN CLOSE
PROXIMITY TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND WE, CITIZENS OF CARLSBAD
OBJECT TO THE BUILDING OF A THREE STORY SELF STORAGE BUILDING
COMPLEX IN OUR RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL AREA. WE ARE INFORMED
AND BELIEVE THAT IT WILL CONTRIBUTE TO MORE TRAFFIC CONGESTION,
PARKING PROBLEMS, CRIMINAL ACTIVITY. AND RAISES OTHER
ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS AND NEGATIVE EFFECTS, SUCH AS AN
AESTHETICALLY INAPPROPRIATE SKYLINE. OUR VILLAGE AREA, ESPECIALLY
OUR BARRIO IS NOT THE APPROPRIATE PLACE FOR THIS LARGE
DEVELOPMENT
NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE
WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, PROPERTY OWNERS AND/OR RESIDENTS IN CLOSE
PROXIMITY TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND WE, CITIZENS OF CARLSBAD
OBJECT TO THE BUILDING OF A THREE STORY SELF STORAGE BUILDING
COMPLEX IN OUR RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL AREA. WE ARE INFORMED
AND BELIEVE THAT IT WILL CONTRIBUTE TO MORE TRAFFIC CONGESTION,
PARKING PROBLEMS. CRIMINAL ACTIVITY. AND RAISES OTHER
ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS AND NEGATIVE EFFECTS, SUCH AS AN
AESTHETICALLY INAPPROPRIATE SKYLINE. OUR VILLAGE AREA, ESPECIALLY
OUR BARRIO IS NOT THE APPROPRIATE PLACE FOR THIS LARGE
DEVELOPMENT
NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE
4
7.:? f -0^9S~
JT 2 2>ld Fi^r/yC C:y^^^AJ\UA^
NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE
P.
^3 00> ^T'lM^g^jz^^ig/^ ^ ^
<^jf^ /:as '^S'djes'Ti^ii/^
__
NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE
Tot-^/NS i^ou c4^rriuu.-r 72-^- q7-^D
-
3J S'g -rTAx^ s-r
•72.0 7 ^ L /
NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE
9.7/
dZ^yr^ ^^^^^ t/3S^ • // 4^
SN
?LT,^ tBi^ '^^^'T^ C^<.^T^cA msL^^yz^i'>^^
NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE
A.v At li]UilJX\LMM l^O I Ty<Y^
a
<^^C(<y^f'0(.0^ t7/7S" TTZ^ -yAn^nifO
'^7l^ l8'4MM'K//rm^Gw>r
i^k g 1^ ^ (rv ?s A/ir^nl .'.s^ a- n I un-ISO-grin's
'](fO-9i'i~ j"=(57
NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE
Atonr( t4r,^ii,^c ^>77 ^arJ\vnj s/ ^oy/sLr/ 7 30 OS
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
Decembers, 2001
ROBERT SCHMITT
HNB INC
29095 ROCKY POINT WAY
ESCONDIDO, CA 92026
SUBJECT: Carisbad Village Self Storage (RP 01-09)
APN: 204-070-02 thru 07, 11, 12
Dear Robert:
As you know, the Design Review Board held a public hearing on November 26, 2001 to
consider a request for a Major Redevelopment Permit for Carisbad Village Self Storage
(RPOl-09). Following public input the Board voted 3 to 0 to recommend approval of the
project to the Housing and Redevelopment Commission. The Commission hearing will
be held at the beginning of January 2002. You will be notified once a permanent date
is established. Per your request, I have enclosed copies of the signed Design Review
Board resolutions. These will be fon/varded to the Housing & Redevelopment
Commission along with a staff report. A copy of the report will also be sent to you once
the Commission meeting date is established.
Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813, if you have any questions regarding the
information in this correspondence.
Since
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 @
1 1-26-01 : ]y :C9 lOcearsde Giasst ^639295860
November 26, 2001
Lori Rosenstein
City of Carlsbad
Housing and Redevelopment Department
2965 Roosevelt Street. Suite B
Carisbad, Ca 92008-2389
Dear Lori,
RBCEIVED
NOV 26 2001
CITYOFCARLSBAD
I am one of the principal owners of Oceanside Glasstile Company. Our Company, a manufacturer of
glass tile made from recycled bottles, has been located In Carisbad Village since 1994. We leased
the property located at 3235 Tyler Street for the past 8 years, and purchased the 3251-3281 Tyler
Street property two years ago. Both properties are currently being sold to the owner of the Carlsbad
Village Self Storage project.
Earlier this year we made the decision to relocate our operations to a different facility that could meet
our future business expansion needs. Unfortunately, the two Tyler Street properties did not appear to
be viable for meeting these needs. Accordingly we purchased a 48,000 square foot facility near
Palomar Airport. It was important to us that we stayed in Carisbad, as we consider it our home, and
as it is home to many of our employees. We are committed to our employees and the community of
Carisbad.
The condition of the 3235 Tyler street buildings is in a total state of disrepair. The 3 metal structures
were built in the 1940's and lack the most basic level of functionality for any legitimate business.
Additionally, the appearance of the property does not help the image of the neighborhood. The
adjacent property is basically an unimproved lot, which does not add to the value of neighborhood
either. VVithout the Storage project, these two properties would most likely remain unoccupied and
derelict.
I have reviewed the architectural drawings and color elevations ofthe Carisbad Village Self Storage
project and 1 am very impressed. I think the design of the property is a good fit with the mission style
approach to Carisbad. This will be one ofthe nicest looking buildings in the village, and will
significantly contribute to the neighborhood's revitalization. The Carlsbad Village Self Storage
project is a needed component ofthe village that will add great economic benefit to the community of
Carisbad.
As a business owner in Carisbad, 1 want to officially state my support for the Carisbad Village Self
Storage project.
Best regards,
M
President
2293 Cosmos Court
"Quality You Can Trust" K&K LABORATORIES, INC.
RECEIVED
November 23, 2001 NOV 2r 2001
CITYOFCARLSBAD
HOUSING&REDEVELOPMENT DS-ARTMENT
Lon Rosenstein
City of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
2965 Roosevelt Street
Suite B
Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389
Case: Carlsbad Village Self Storage
RP 01-09
Dear Lori,
Thank you for returning my call so quickly to answer my question
regarding permit RP 01-09.
I would like to express on behalf of K & K Laboratories, Inc. and the
Kononchuk family our support for the proposal to build the self storage
facility at 3235-3281 Tyler Street. As owners of the property and
business adjacent to the south side of the proposed project, we would be
more adversely affected by an inappropriate use or development at that
site than most of our neighbors. Having reviewed the plans with Robert
Schmitt, however, I believe that the facility would be appropriate in
both use and design, and would provide a service not readily available
in this part of Carlsbad.
It is good public policy to approve good proposals, in my opinion. It
encourages investment by the sort of businesses that contribute to the
city and its communities. While varying opinions regarding architectural
taste are entitled to a fair hearing, absent a compelling objective
reason to reject it, I believe that the Design Review Board should
approve the proposal both on its ovm considerable mterits and as a matter
of good governance.
Thank you.
.Sincerely,
Alex Kononchuk, Jr.
Director of Operations
3305 TYLER STREET • GARLSBAD, CA 92008 (760) 434-6044
^/iarcCg. ScHnetder
7136 "Uista OeCMar
LaJolXa, CaCifomia 92037
(858)456-3866
November 16,2001
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT DEPT.
2965 Roosevelt Street
Suite B
Carisbad, Califomia 92008-2389
RE: CASE No. RPOl-09
CARLSBAD VILLAGE SELF STORAGE
Dear Gentlepersons:
I am the owner of a 48-unit apartment community known as San Katrina Apartments, located at 336 Pine
Avenue, directly across the railroad tracks from your proposed self storage development. I, along with many
of our tenants, would like to register our objection to this project, as we believe this site could be used much
more beneficially for a higher and better use than self storage. The reasons for our opposition is that we feel
that the area is primarily residential, and is just several blocks from the beachfront. The fact that this
building will be three stories, and almost 150,000 square feet, will provide both a visual blight and add to
congestion in the beach area. Certainly, there are better uses for this desirable site, and housing for both
single family, or multi family, might be one of them.
This is a rare opportunity for Carlsbad to improve this desirable area, rather than to impose a project that
will forever have a negative impact.
Yours truly,
7"
Lichard Gr. Schneider
Mov 15 01 05: 1 lp Tor i o (858) 551-1147 p.2
To: Design Review Board
Housing & Redevelopment Department
City of Carlsbad
2965 R(X)sevelt Streel, Suite B
Carlsbad. Ca. 92008-2389
From: Louis P. Torio
326 Rosemont Slreet
La Jolla, Ca. 92037
Owner, Village Poinle Apartinents
3160 Lincoln Street
Carlsbad, Ca. 92008
858 551-1147
Re Case No.: RPOl-09
Case Name; Carlsbad Village Self Storage
For a three story building in that location, which is across the street from residential
and across the railroad tracks from residential, and just two blocks from the beachlionl, I
believe vaiiances for fmnt and back yard setbacks is a liule too much.
Ill fact 1 question the usage and iLs etTecls on the immediate neighborhood,
especially the proposed height and the traffic it will generate. I think it will have a
dcletorious effect on the habitability of the barrio and other aieas for the ne.xt 30 or 50
years.
Sincerely,
Louis F. Torio
MDv 19nni 858 551 1147 PAGE. 02
HNB, Inc.
A Development, Investment and Commercial Brokerage Group
29095 Rocky Point Way ~ Escondido, CA 92026
Phone 760-751-2017 ~ Fax 760-751-2019 ~ E-mail rschmiU@nctimes.net
RECEIVEO
October 30,2001 OCT 3 0 2001
Lon Rosenstein
Management Analyst
City of Carlsbad
2965 Roosevelt St., Suite B
Carlsbad, CA 92008
RE: Carlsbad Village Self-Storage
Dear Lori:
Enclosed please find the four sets of revised plans for Carlsbad Village Self-Storage.
Also included are the comments from RMA Engineering. We have addressed al of the
staff comments in your letter dated October 11^^ with the following exceptions
Engineering:
1. Show how peak hour and per hour trips were determined. By the end of the week
Ariel Valli will provide this information and he will also substantiate self-storage
traffic generation from information provided by the Institute for Traffic
Engineers.
2. 2. Provide a "Letter of Intent to Vacate or Quitclaim Easement". Habib Warwar
of RMA engineering has contacted the easement holders and we are waiting for
their response. The response from SDG&E was received this moming and I have
enclosed their response for your review. The Carlsbad Mimicipal Water District,
Mr. Bill Plummer, was contacted on September 25* and we are waiting for their
response. The third easement holder, Signal Aircraft Parts, appears to be a defunct
corporation and Commonwealth Title is in the process of preparing the necessary
documents.
3. Provide a letter from the soils engineer authorizing the narrow distance between
the building foundation and the drainage swale/drain pipe. Donna Gooley of
GeoSoils will have her soils report complete by November 5* and the report will
address the drainage issue.
Carlsbad Village Storage
October 30, 2001
Page 2
Housing and Redevelopment:
1. Change the permit number to RP 01 -09. Ariel will have this change on the final
package.
2. Sign plan submittal: Our proposed sign plan is included in this package
however the total allowable sign square footage is 196 SF and our indicated
total for our project is 133.5 SF. Please note that this will be corrected to the
total allowable square footage.
Please let us know if you require any additional information.
Sincerely,
^ 101 Ash Street
Sempra Energy' San Diego, CA 92101-3017
October 29, 2001
Ron Martin & Associates, Inc
942 Calle Negocio, Suite 100
San Clemente, CA 92673-6232
Att: Habib Warwar
Re: Carlsbad Village Storage - Quitclaim
San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E) is the holder of easements recorded
October 20, 1949 in Book 3357, Page 450 and recorded June 30, 1954 in Book 5285,
Page 355 both of Official Records. It is SDG&E policy to quitclaim easements only
when the facilities covered by the easement are removed.
SDG&E has reviewed the above mentioned easements over Assessor Parcel No. 204-
010-11 & 12, and 204-07-01 and foimd that the facilities covered by these easements are
still in service. We are unable to do a Quitclaim on these easments at this time.
I understand the developer is in the process of having these facilities removed and/or
relocated. SDG&E will process your quitclaim once the existing facilities are removed
and/or relocated. The fee for processing these easements will be $500.00 payable to
SDG&E. Please resubmit you request & check once these facilities have been removed.
The processing time for a quitclaim can take 90 days.
Should you have any question, please contact me at (858) 650-4117. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Coimie P. Peacock
Administrative Associate
Duly Authorized Agent for SDG&E
cc: Lori Rosenstein, City of Carlsbad
RECBVED
RMA
RON MARTIN fi ASSOCIATES, INC. RFrplWCh
Engineering, Planning, Surveying ^WUIVCl/
OCT .30 2001
October 25, 2001 HOus%W££?Ji'-SBAD
Ms. Lori H. Rosenstein:
Management Analyst
City of Carisbad
Housing and Redevelopment Department
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008
Subject: Carlsbad Village Self Storage in Carlsbad (RP 01-09),
APN: 204-070-02 thru 07,11,12,
(RMA Job No. 785-0100.)
Attached are the revised plans and Ron Martin and Associate's (RMA) responses
to the City's comments from October 11, 2001.
ENGINEERiNG:
1. The SANDAG generation rates and calculations wil! be shown on Vaili
Architectural Group plans.
2. All easement holders impacted by the project has been contacted.
However, we will pursue this matter. As soon as we receive their Letter of
Intent to Quitclaim Easement, it will be immediately submitted to the City.
3. The clearance from the building as well as from the bollards of the
proposed on-site fire hydrant has been changed to 3 foot as shown on
plans.
4. The drainpipe within the narrow distance located at both of the side yards
is only 8 inches in diameter with a minimum cover of 6 inches, total of 14
inches below finish grade. It can be placed close to the proposed building
away from property line if necessary, and it can be worked out around the
building foundation. Drain inlets were shown within the side yards with a
note "Atrium Grade @ 40' Typ.". However, they will be more highlighted
as they are shown on these submitted plans.
5. The 4.5 foot easement was shown on our plans from last submittal with
the label of "Proposed 4.5 foot easement dedicated to City Right of Way"
shown at the NE corner of property. However, the note will change to
read "Proposed 4.5 foot wide dedication for Public Right-of-way".
942 Calle Negocio, Suite ioo, San Clemente, California 92673-6232
Phone (949) 369-8080 Fax (949) 369-8083
E-mail: rm a f i I e s fi> a 11 g I o b a 1. n e t
RMA
RON MARTIN S ASSOCIATES, INC
Engineering, Planning, Surveying
6. As was noted in our response to the City's comments from August 30,
2001, the material to be filled in the French Drain is Rocks. However it will
be noted on Section C-C, sheet 2 of 2.
The 8-inch drainpipe has been aligned into the French Drain as shown on
plans.
The existing 3" storm drainpipe will not be used and could stay in place. If
future connection is going to be made to the proposed City's 54" storm
drain, the existing 3" PVC pipe will be replaced with a larger size pipe.
If you have any questions, please contact me either by phone at (949) 369-
8080x12, or at my E-mail address: habibwarwar@rma-eng.com.
Habib Warwar
Ron Martin & Associates
942 Calle Negocio, Suite loo, San Clemente, California 92673-6232
Phone(949)369-8080 Fax(949)369-8083
E-mail: rmafilesaattglobal.net
OCTOBER 23, 2001
TO: CRIME PREVENTION SPECIALIST, JODEE SASWAY
FROM: Management Analyst, Redevelopment Department
Carlsbad Village Self Storage (RPOl-09)
The Housing & Redevelopment Department is currently processing a
redevelopment permit for a new self-storage facility on the west side of Tyler
Street between Walnut Avenue and Oak Avenue (33251-3281 Tyler Street). The
project is scheduled to go to the Design Review Board at the end of November.
A local resident has raised some concerns regarding crime associated with these
types of uses. I am therefore requesting your assistance in reviewing the
attached plans to see if there is anything you believe should be included in the
project related to security. Due to the timing of the project it would be helpful if
your suggestions could be worded such that they could be incorporated as
conditions of approval. I would greatly appreciate it if you could send me your
comments and/or conditions by November 2, 2001.
If you have any questions, please contact me at x2813. Thank you in advance
for your assistance on this matter.
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
October 11, 2001
ROBERT SCHMITT
HNB INC
29095 ROCKY POINT WAY
ESCONDIDO, CA 92026
SUBJECT: Carlsbad Village Self Storage (RP 01-09)
APN: 204-070-02 thru 07, 11, 12
In a letter to you, dated August 30, 2001, the application for Major Redevelopment
Permit (RP 01-09) was found complete for further processing by the City of Carlsbad.
In addition, on September 25, 2001, the landscape plan corrections were sent to you for
your review. On September 14, 2001 you submitted revised plans in response to
comments made by various City departments in our August 30*^ correspondence.
The purpose of this letter is to follow-up on remaining issues of concern raised by staff
following a review of the plans submitted on September 14*^ and provide you will a time
line for submitting final information in preparation for the November 26, 2001 Design
Review Board meeting. Please see the attached list for more details.
Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813, if you have any questions regarding the
information in this correspondence.
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
c: Debbie Fountain, Housing &. Redevelopment Director
David, Engineering
Mike Grim, Planning
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 @
FINAL ISSUES
No. RP 01-09
Staff has completed a review of the subject project for remaining issues. The following
items need to be adequately addressed prior to staff establishing final conditions of
approval for the proposed project:
ENGINEERING:
The Engineering Department has completed its review of the above referenced project for
compliance with the previously determined issues. The project still has issues that must
be addressed. The following is a list of these issues:
1. How were the estimated peak hour and per hour average determined? On the site
plan, calculate the total average daily trips generated based on SANDAG generation
rates (office = 20 ADT/1000 s.f., storage = 2 ADT/1000 s.f.). Show all calculations.
Although these rates may seem slightly inflated to actual counts, the office and
storage uses described under SANDAG's generation rates are the closest uses
resembling a self-storage facility.
2. Provide a "Letter of Intent to Vacate or Quitclaim Easement" or a "non-interference"
letter from each easement holder impacted by the project. The project will be
conditionally approved to quitclaim said easements prior to development. The City
has received your request for a "Letter of Intent to Quitclaim". The City is reviewing
your request.
3. In our recent meeting with Habib Wan/var we were informed by Fire administration
that the fire hydrant may be located 3 feet from the building which is contrary to the
5 feet stated in my earlier letter. Show the hydrant 3 feet from the building and all
bollards must be 3 feet clear as well. Locating it as close to the building as possible
will provide maximum clear driveway aisle.
4. Provide a letter from the soils engineer authorizing the narrow distance between the
building foundation and drainage swale/drain pipe. If acceptable, the engineer must
include any recommended mitigation measures. Incorporate such measures into
the plans. Also, show location of all drain inlets within the side yards.
5. As per our previous meeting, show a "Proposed 4.5 foot wide dedication for Public
Right-of-Way" along the property street frontage.
6. Clarify what material will be filled in the "French Drain". Also, align 8-inch drainpipe
into "French Drain" rather than the grade sloping to the French Drain. Will the
existing 3-inch drain pipe at the rear of the lot daylight into the French Drain or be
utilized in some other way?
If you have any questions regarding the Engineering Department's comments, please
contact David Rick at 602-2781.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT:
Please submit 4 sets of revised plans to the Housing & Redevelopment Department no
later than Monday, October 22, 2001. The plans should address the Engineering
issues listed above, as well as the following:
. On the site plan, under application type change permit number to RP 01-09.
Provide a sign plan with the next submittal: a) Show location of monument sign on
site plan (contact David Rick with the Engineering Department for sight distance
standards); b) show elevation of proposed monument; c) include location and
dimensions for all wall signs on the building elevations; d) provide a table showing
maximum sign area allowed (i.e. 1 sq. foot of signage per linear foot of building
frontage on a public street) and total sign area proposed.
No later than Monday, November 5, 2001, please submit the required public
notification package. The public notification package shall include the following
information:
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.
>^4. 600' Radius Map: A map to scale not less than 1" = 200' showing each lot within
O 600' of the exterior boundaries of the subject property. Each of these lots shall be
consecutively numbered and correspond with the property owners list.
yyb. Two (2) separate sets of mailing labels of the property owners within a 600' radius of
O the subject property. The list must be typed in atl 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 Mrs. Jane Smith MRS JANE SMITH
123 Magnolia Ave., Apt #3 123 Magnolia Ave. APT 3
Carlsbad, CA 92008 Apt. #3 123 MAGNOLIA AVE
Carlsbad, CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92008
No later than, Thursday, November 15, 2001, please submit the following for use at
the Design Review Board hearing:
A materials board (%V2 x 11") to coincide with color board showing sample roof
material and stucco, if available.
. One (1) copy of a colored site plan.
^ 8. One (1) copy of a colored rendering of the front elevation accurately depicting the
proposed mature landscaping and how it relates to the building.
0^. Ten (10) sets of full size plans folded to 8V2' x 11".
'bUo. One (1) set of xll" reduced plans.
i^H 1. Optional: ten (10) sets of 8^2" xll" reduced colored building elevations.
^*lf^ Electronic files of the colored site plan, colored rendering, and all building elevations
^ presented on disk or sent via e-mail to lrose@ci.carlsbad.ca.us
For questions regarding Housing & Redevelopment Department comments, please
contact Lori Rosenstein at 760-434-2813.
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
August 30, 2001
ROBERT SCHMITT
HNB INC
29095 ROCKY POINT WAY
ESCONDIDO, CA 92026
SUBJECT: Carlsbad Village Self Storage (RP 01 -09)
APN: 204-070-02 thru 07, 11, 12
Thank you for applying for a land use permit in the City of Carlsbad. The Housing and
Redevelopment Department, along with all other appropriate City departments, has reviewed
your Major Redevelopment Permit, application no. RP 01-09, as to its completeness for
processing.
The application is complete, as submitted. Although the initial processing of your application
may have already begun, the technical acceptance date is acknowledged by the date of this
communication. The City may, in the course of processing the application, request that you
clarify, amplify, correct, or othenA/ise, supplement the basic information required for the
application. In addition, you should also be aware that various design issues may exist. These
issues must be addressed before this application can be scheduled for a hearing. The Housing
and Redevelopment Department will begin processing your application as of the date of this
communication.
In an effort to continue to process the application in the most expeditious manner as possible, a
list of issues identified by staff during the initial project review phase has been included with this
correspondence.
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.
Sincerely,
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
c: Debbie Fountain, Housing & Redevelopment Director
David, Engineering
Mike Grim, Planning
Pat Kelley, Building
Colleen Balch, Fire
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 ^
ISSUES OF CONCERN
No. RP 01-09
Staff has completed a 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:
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 that need to be
resolved or adequately addressed prior to staff making a determination on the proposed project
are as follows:
1. On the Preliminary Development Plan:
a. Show the property line separating Lot 6 from Lot 7. Add a note stating that this line is to
be removed. An adjustment plat must be processed and the project will be conditioned
accordingly.
b. On sheet 1 of 2, reference the dates and order numbers of the title reports submitted
with the application. Also, label the appropriate lot number above corresponding list of
easements.
c. How were the estimated peak hour and per hour average determined? Add the office
(20/1000 sf) and storage (2/1000 sf) average daily trips using the SANDAG generation
rates on the site plan. Although these rates may seem slightly inflated to actual counts,
the office and storage uses described under SANDAG's generation rates are the closest
uses resembling a self-storage facility. Although SANDAG rates need to be added to
the plans, any additional studies that might give a more accurate estimated count will be
considered.
d. Show the City storm drain, sewer line (?) and related infrastructure (e.g. drain inlets)
proposed within the railroad right-of-way at the rear of the property. You may contact
Terry Smith (760-602-2765) in the City Engineering Department for more information
regarding plans and construction.
1. Provide a "Letter of Intent to Vacate or Quitclaim easement" or a "non-interference" letter
from each easement holder impacted by the project. The project will be conditionally
approved to quitclaim said easements prior to development.
2. Although the preliminary review letter stated that the parking stalls located on the south
driveway could conflict with one way circulation, we concluded after further review that the
best design would be to remove parking stalls 1 and 5 and place these spaces on the south
driveway. Stalls 1 and 5 are too close to the entrance and would cause potential circulation
conflicts. (See Housing & Redevelopment comment below.)
3. The sewer cleanout must be located outside any parking spaces and placed on the property
adjacent to the front property line in an easily accessible location. Under the current design,
that would place the cleanout in parking stall 1, however, because this space is to be
replaced with landscaping, this issue should not be of any further concern.
4. Remove the Double Check Valve for the 8" service. Loop the water line by extending the
onsite water main along the south driveway to the street main. Add gate valves and thrust
block at each on-site fire hydrant tee. Add "proposed 20 foot wide CMWD easement".
Furthermore, either locate the two fire hydrants across the driveway in the opposite corner
or some other place with higher visibility to drivers OR place a 6 inch high curb with raised
concrete platform at the current proposed location. The hydrants, however, need to be
located 5 feet clear of the building, which will require a shift in their location. The current
design of using only bollards at this location will not provide adequate driver visibility and
protection needed to prevent potential collisions.
5. Is "processing" as described on Sheet 1 of 2 under Earthwork Quantities considered
remedial (excavation and recompaction, soil treatment, etc.) grading? It appears that based
on these quantities, a grading permit will be required.
6. The soils report submitted addresses construction of a previously proposed project, not the
current self-storage project. At this stage of review, this report is acceptable but a new
report addressing the proposed self-storage project will be required with your submittal for a
grading permit. There is an issue, however, that needs to be addressed with this
redevelopment permit. Provide a letter from the soils engineer addressing
recommendations for drainage along the sides of the property. The distance between the
proposed building foundation and side property lines is only 5 feet. In addition, both
properties abutting the subject property have buildings located at the property line.
Therefore, there is only a 5- foot separation between buildings. Where will the earth
drainage swale be located between these buildings? Will it be located 2.5 feet from the
foundation? Are deepened footings recommended? If so, do you propose modifying the
footings on the neighbor's building? Please address this issue and provide a typical cross
section of the side yard to illustrate recommendations.
7. Tentative Order No. 2001-01 was recently issued by the California Regional Water Quality
Control Board. This action leads to updates in the National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit whereby the City of Carlsbad is a co-Permittee to the City of San
Diego. These new regulations involve significant changes to this project and other projects
processed throughout the San Diego region. In order to facilitate the compliance of this
project, the following are some criteria that should be incorporated into the design of the
project:
a) All efforts must be made to ensure that post development storm run-off flows and
velocities do not exceed pre-development storm run-off flows. You have adequately
addressed this issue as presented in the submitted drainage report.
b) Incorporate Best Management Practices (BMP's) as outlined in the California Storm
Water Best Management Practice Handbooks, latest edition. The proposed rip rap and
surface flow across the rear yard provides a good attempt but a more effective solution
would be to include a 20 foot wide vegetated swale parallel with the rear property line
which extends across the entire rear yard. Revise the landscape plan to incorporate an
appropriate plant, such as fescue grass, to adequately filtrate pollutants such as oil,
heavy metals, etc. Provide a cross section of the swale. Design to allow overflow to
sheet flow across rear property line. Adding such a swale to permit settling of runoff will
also help reduce the rate of runoff.
c) Offsite and downstream siltation will not be permitted at any time during construction or
once the project is in use.
d) The applicant will be required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP) that addresses planning, construction and post-construction phases of the
project. The SWPPP will be required before issuance of development permits. The
project will be conditioned accordingly.
We encourage you to review the draft permit requirements
(http://www.swrcb.ca.qov/nA/qcb9/Proqrams/Storm Water/storm water.html) so that you
understand the nature of our comments when they are made on projects. Per Section
F.1.b.(1) of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region Order
No. 2001 -01, the project must ensure that pollutant discharges and runoff flows from the
development are reduced to the maximum extent practicable using best management
practices for the existing and proposed portions of the project site. Numeric sizing of all
filtration and volume control facilities is required.
A redlined check print is enclosed for your use in making the requested revisions. This check
print must be returned with the next submittal to facilitate continued staff review. If you have
any questions regarding engineering issues, please contact David Rick in the Engineering
Department at 602-2781.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT and PLANNING:
On the site plan under application type add permit number (RP 01-09).
^ 2. Show roof pitch. A minimum 5:12 roof pitch is required.
^ Provide a sign plan with the next submittal.
Submit a materials board to coincide with color board.
and 5 to the southern egress to satisfy Engineering
10 feet back to create a landscape buffer between
parking and the sidewalk. Please consult with Engineering to determine the minimum
number of feet needed to eliminate circulation conflicts.
pV^. Rather than relocating parking spaces 1
^ concerns, move entire building(s) 5-10
jfer With the increased front yard setback consider more variations to the front landscape area.
^ Possible suggestions include: mounding, meandering walkways, decorative paving,
pedestrian seating areas, etc.
0 For the public hearing, a final colored elevation will be required accurately depicting the
proposed landscaping and how it relates to the building.
For questions regarding Housing & Redevelopment Department comments, please contact Lori
Rosenstein at 760-434-2813.
BUILDING:
The Building Department has the following comments on the proposed project:
1. The storage facility is proposed to be 5 feet from the side yard property lines; therefore the
walls must be fire-resistive. The roof plan and elevations do not indicate parapets; therefore,
UBC requirements to delete parapets will be applicable. This may result in an added
expense.
2. Details of the construction of the windows adjacent to the side property lines must show
how they're integrated into the wall assembly so fire resistivity is not compromised.
For questions regarding Building Department comments, please contact Chief Building
Inspector Pat Kelley at 760-602-2716.
FIRE:
1. Please include the following notes on the site plan:
a) All buildings shall be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers.
b) Entry gates are to be equipped with Knox override switches.
1. Rental agreement shall include language stating that storage cannot be within 2 feet of the
ceiling.
2. Provide information on the site plan showing the location of all fire hydrants within 300 feet
of the project. Additional fire hydrants may be required.
For questions regarding Fire Department comments, please contact Deputy Fire Marshall
Colleen Balch at 760-602-4662.
LANDSCAPE PLANCHECK:
Landscape plancheck comments will be sent to you under a separate cover.
RECEIVED
AUG 2 0 200 Memorandum
CITY OF CARLSBAD H0US1NG&_REDEVEL0PMENT DEPAWMENT
TO: Lori Rosenstein - Housing and Redevelopment
FROM: David Rick - Assistant Engineer
DATE: August 15, 2001
RP 01-09 Carlsbad Village Self Storage
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. On the Preliminary Development Plan:
a. Show the property line separating Lot 6 from Lot 7. Add a note stating
that this line is to be removed. An adjustment plat must be processed and
the project will be conditioned accordingly.
b. On sheet 1 of 2, reference the dates and order numbers of the title reports
submitted with the application. Also, label the appropriate lot number
above corresponding list of easements.
c. How were the estimated peak hour and per hour average determined?
Add the office (20/1000 sf) and storage (2/1000 sf) average daily trips
using the SANDAG generation rates on the site plan. Although these
rates may seem slightly inflated to actual counts, the office and storage
uses described under SANDAG's generation rates are the closest uses
resembling a self storage facility. Although SANDAG rates need to be
added to the plans, any additionai studies that might give a more accurate
estimated count will be considered.
d. Show the City storm drain, sewer line(?) and related infrastructure (e.g.
drain inlets) proposed within the railroad right-of-way at the rear of the
property. You may contact Terry Smith (760-602-2765) in the City
Engineering Department for more information regarding plans and
construction.
2. Provide a "Letter of Intent to Vacate or Quitclaim easement" or a "non-
interference" letter from each easement holder impacted by the project. The
project will be conditionally approved to quitclaim said easements prior to
development.
3. Although the preliminary review letter stated that the parking stalls located on the
south driveway could conflict with one way circulation, we concluded after further
review that the best design would be to remove parking stalls 1 and 5 and place
these spaces on the south driveway. Stalls 1 and 5 are to close to the entrance
and would cause potential circulation conflicts.
4. The sewer cleanout must be located outside any parking spaces and placed on
the property adjacent to the front property line in an easily accessible location.
Under the current design, that would place the cleanout in parking stall 1 but
because this space is to be replaced with landscaping, this issue should not be
of any further concern.
5. Remove the Double Check Valve for the 8" service. Loop the water line by
extending the onsite water main along the south driveway to the street main.
Add gate valves and thrust block at each on-site fire hydrant tee. Add "proposed
20 foot wide CMWD easement". Furthermore, either locate the two fire hydrants
across the driveway in the opposite corner or some other place with higher
visibility to drivers OR place a 6 inch high curb with raised concrete platform at
the current proposed location. The hydrants, however, need to be located 5 feet
clear of the building, which will require a shift in their location. The current
design of using only bollards at this location will not provide adequate driver
visibility and protection needed to prevent potential collisions.
6. Is "processing" as described on Sheet 1 of 2 under Earthwork Quantities
considered remedial (excavation and recompaction, soil treatment, etc.) grading?
It appears that based on these quantities, a grading permit will be required.
7. The soils report submitted addresses construction of a previously proposed
project, not the current self storage project. At this stage of review, this report is
acceptable but a new report addressing the proposed self storage project will be
required with your submittal for a grading permit. There is an issue, however,
that needs to be addressed with this redevelopment permit. Provide a letter from
the soils engineer addressing recommendations for drainage along the sides of
the property. The distance between the proposed building foundation and side
property lines is only 5 feet. In addition, both properties abutting the subject
property have buildings located at the property line. Therefore, there is only a 5-
foot separation between buildings. Where will the earth drainage swale be
located between these buildings? Will it be located 2.5 feet from the foundation?
Are deepened footings recommended? If so, do you propose modifying the
footings on the neighbor's building? Please address this issue and provide a
typical cross section of the side yard to illustrate recommendations.
8. Tentative Order No. 2001-01 was recently issued by the California Regional
Water Quality Control Board. This action leads to updates in the National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit whereby the City of
Carlsbad is a co-Permittee to the City of San Diego. These new regulations
involve significant changes to this project and other projects processed
throughout the San Diego region. In order to facilitate the compliance of this
project, the following are some criteria that should be incorporated into the
design ofthe project:
a) All efforts must be made to ensure that post development storm run-off
flows and velocities do not exceed pre-development storm run-off flows.
You have adequately addressed this issue as presented in the submitted
drainage report.
b) Incorporate Best Management Practices (BMP's) as outlined in the
California Storm Water Best Management Practice Handbooks, latest
edition. The proposed rip rap and surface flow across the rear yard
provides a good attempt but a more effective solution would be to include
a 20 foot wide vegetated swale parallel with the rear property line which
extends across the entire rear yard. Revise the landscape plan to
incorporate an appropriate plant, such as fescue grass, to adequately
filtrate pollutants such as oil, heavy metals, etc. Provide a cross section
of the swale. Design to allow overflow to sheet flow across rear property
line. Adding such a swale to permit settling of runoff will also help reduce
the rate of runoff.
c) Offsite and downstream siltation will not be permitted at any time during
construction or once the project is in use.
d) The applicant will be required to submit a Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that addresses planning, construction and
post-construction phases of the project. The SWPPP will be required
before issuance of development permits. The project will be conditioned
accordingly.
We encourage you to review the draft permit requirements
(http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/nA/qcb9/Programs/Storm Water/storm water.html)
so that you understand the nature of our comments when they are made on
projects. Per Section F.l.b.(l) of the California Regional Water Quality
Control Board San Diego Region Order No. 2001-01, the project must ensure
that pollutant discharges and runoff flows from the development are reduced
to the maximum extent practicable using best management practices for the
existing and proposed portions of the project site. Numeric sizing of ali
filtration and volume control facilities is required.
Please send enclosed redlined plans to the applicant and tell them to return the
redlined plans with their next submittal. If you or the applicant has any questions,
please either see or contact me at 602-2781.
DAVID RICK
Assistant Engineer
Engineering Development Services Division