Loading...
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