Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRP 02-02; Kent Jessee Office Building; Redevelopment Permits (RP) (2)Citv of Carlsbad Public Works — Engineeri February 28, 2006 02 /Cfig Julie Appollo Executive Assistant W. KENT JESSE AND ASSOCIATES 2075 Corte Del Nogal, Suite S Carlsbad, OA 92011 2815 JEFFERSON STREET I have reviewed your request with the Public Works Director to have white curb painted in the public right-of-way to serve your building. Unfortunately, we cannot accommodate your request, and the Public Works Director will not authorize staff to paint the curb. Currently, on-street parking in the public right-of-way is allowed under provisions of the Carlsbad Municipal Code at your location not-to-exceed 72 consecutive hours. You are requesting that the parking time limit be reduced to three minutes via installation of white curb to serve your needs (three minutes is designated pursuant to the Carlsbad Municipal Code section 10.40.090(3)). The United States Postal Service has no jurisdiction over Carlsbad's public right-of-way. It remains your responsibility to meet the needs of the post office by providing facilities on your property in order to receive mail. ROBERT T. JOHNSON, JR., P.E. Deputy City Engineer, Transportation RTJ:jb c: Public Works Director Housing and Redevelopment Director 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-2720 • FAX (760) 602-8562 @ RECEIVED FEB 22 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT February 21, 2006 2075 Corte Dd Nogal Suite S CarisbadlCA 92009 760 •918 • 9630 Fax 760 •918 •9631 Bob Johnsoti Engineering Department City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 2815 Jefferson Street Dear Mr. Johnson, The construction at 2815 Jefferson Street is now complete and we are in the process of installing the mailbox for that building. When speaking with Tony Pema, USPS, he explained a parking place would have to be provided or the curb would have to be painted white. Because the city of Carlsbad requires a certain number of parking spaces for tenant use at our commercial building, we do not have a parking space available to allocate specifically for the USPS. We are requesting the curb in fi-ont of the building be painted white so we may be in compliance with the USPS and receive mail. Thank you, miie Appollo Executive Assistant Cc: Tony R. Pema, USPS Q/liogy Oif Mdk: Citv of Carlsbad Public Works Engineering July 13, 2004 William Kent Jesse 2075 Corte Del Nogle, Suite S Carlsbad CA 92009 COMPLETION OF GRADING PLANCHECK FOR: DWG 417-5A (SHEETS 1-4) PROJECT NAME & NO.: KENT JESSE OFFICE BUILDiNG, RP 02-02 This correspondence is to inform you that the City Engineer has signed the Grading Plans for the project noted above. These plans are now the property of the City of Carlsbad and have been filed for permanent record with this office. Signature of your Grading Plans clears the way for issuance of your grading permit subject to the limitations and requirements of City Ordinances, your conditions of approval (if any) and all requirements for outside agency permits such as the Coastal Commission. The approval of these plans by the City of Carlsbad does not authorize the applicant to violate any federal, state, or city laws, ordinances, regulations or policies including, but not limited to, the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 and any amendments thereto. Presently, our records indicate your project is clear for grading permit issuance provided the following items are completed to the satisfaction of this office: 1. Provide the City with three (3) sets of bluelines [two (2) bluelines and one (1)11x17 reduced set] ofthe approved grading plans. 2. Apply for a grading permit within the next one (1) year. 3. Provide the City with a copy of this letter. 4. Complete the Grading Permit Application (Attached). Provided that all the above requirements have been met, you may now apply for your grading permit. Please submit all required items to the Engineering Development Services Counter at 1635 Faraday Avenue. Please be aware that fees are subject to change. You may wish to verify permit fees before coming in and applying for your permit. You may obtain the blueline sets and any other reproductions you desire through one of several bonded blueprint firms in the area at your cost. Your grading permit will be issued when all of the above items have been completed. After permit issuance, contact the Engineering Inspection Request Line at 438-3891 to set up a preconstruction meeting with your Inspector. The inspector will bring the permit and give you your copy at the preconstruction meeting. PLEASE DO NOT BEGIN CONSTRUCTION UNTIL YOU HAVE RECEIVED YOUR PERMIT FROM YOUR PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTOR. H:\Developmenl Services\Masters\Letters -\GRADING PLANCHECK COMPLETION LTR 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-2720 • FAX (760) 602-8562 ^ ^ RECEIVED Kent Jesse JUL 1 5 2004 July 13, 2004 Page 2 of 2 HOOSlt^iS & REDFVElOPiViEM' QT3' In addition the following items will be required during the construction of your project. Coordinate the timing of these items with your Construction Inspector: 1. An approved Haul Route Permit prior to hauling any construction equipment or materials onsite or offsite. Allow 2 working days for approval. 2. An approved Traffic Control Plan and a valid Right of Way Permit prior to any work in the public right of way. Allow one week for approval. 3. Obtain a Retaining Wall Permit from the Building Department, if required. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance in this matter. It has been a pleasure working with you through the plancheck process. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 760- 602-2737. Respactfully, Idle Engineer c: Craig Ruiz, Project Planner (w/o attachments) Inspection: Office Specialist (w/ out attachments) Permit Station - Front Counter (w/o attachments) Brent Moore, Partners Engineering (fax letter to 858-376-3555) File Attachments: Grading Permit Application Right of Way Permit Packet H:\Development Services\Masters\Letters -\GRADING PLANCHECK COMPLETION LTR Rev. 11/6/2002 Citv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department August 20, 2003 SCOTT CAIRNS SMITH CONSULTING ARCHITECTS 12220 EL CAMINO REAL STE 200 SAN DIEGOCA 92130 SUBJECT: Kent Jessee Office BIdg. (RP 02-02) APN: 203-110-29 Dear Scott, On August 14, 2003, the Housing and Redevelopment Director reviewed the building elevation modifications made to the previously approved KeTit Jessee Office Building (RP02-02). The plans, dated August 11, 2003, were found to be in substantial conformance with the plans approved by the Housing and Redevelopment Commission on^pril 1, 2003. You may now proceed with submitting the building plans, for plancheck. If you have any questions regarding the information presented in this letter, please contact my office at (760) 434-2813. Since LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 ® # Citv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department April 8, 2003 CHRIS CONNERTON KENT JESSEE & ASSOCIATES 2075 CORTE DEL NOGAL, STE S CARLSBAD.CA 92009-1413 SUBJECT: Kent Jessee Office BIdg. (RP 02-02) APN: 203-110-29 Dear Chris: On April 1, 2003 the Housing and Redevelopment Commission conditionally approved Major Redevelopment Permit No. RP 02-02 for property located at 2715 Jefferson Street. Enclosed please find copies of the resolutions that have been approved for the proposed project. These resolutions include the conditions of approval for the project. Your next step is to obtain the appropriate building permits to construct the proposed addition. Please note, many of the conditions of approval must be satisfied prior to the issuance of building permits. If you have any questions and/or comments regarding this correspondence, please contact my office at (760) 434-2813. Congratulations on the approval of your project and may you have much success in your new endeavor! Since" LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst Enclosure c: Scott Cairns Jeremy Riddle, Engineering Greg Fisher, Planning Pat Kelley, Building Greg Ryan, Fire Prevention Larry Black, Landscape Plan Review 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 ^ February 24, 2003 TO: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD FROM: Management Analyst, Redevelopment CONDITION TO BE ADDED TO DRB RESOLUTION NO. 291 The following standard condition was inadvertently left out of draft Design Review Board Resolution No. 291: Prior to the issuance of grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first. Developer shall submit for City approval a "Storm Water Manangement Plan (SWMP)". The SWMP shall be in compliance with current requirements and provisions established by the San Diego Region of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board and City of Carisbad Requirements. The SWMP shall address measures to reduce, to the maximum extent practicable, storm water pollutant runoff at both construction and post-construction stages of the project. The SWMP shall: a) Identify existing and post-development on-site pollutants. b) Recommend source control and structural Best Management Practices to filter said pollutants. c) Establish specific procedures for handling spills and routine clean up. Special considerations and effort shall be applied to employee education on the proper procedures for handling clean up and disposal of pollutants. d) Ensure long-term maintenance of all post construct BMPs in perpetuity. Staff recommends that the Design Review Board add the condition as Engineering Condition No. 9 to Resolution No. 291. LORI ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst Housing & Redevelopment Department 02/24/2083 10:13 6308396594 J GOLL PAGE 02 February 24 CityofCarlsbad Housmg anc 2965 Roosevelt Carlsbad, Ci^ Re: RP 02 To Whom It My family owns planned project both should 2003 Redevelopment Department Street, Suite B 92008 02 , Kent Jessee Office Building May Concem: the single-family residence at 2865 Jefferson Street, adjacent to the I am concemed about two of the proposed variances, and believe that I )e denied. The request :br a height variance infers that a stmcture larger than would normally be allowed on tijiat lot size is being planned. Given that the area is zoned for mixed use, massive stmctures will diminish livability and desirability of the residential uses. Additionally the charm of the downtown area will be degraded if many ofthe lots are packed with he maximum amount of stmcture. There is also an increasing amount of vehicle traffi: along Jefferson Street, and any large projects are certain to exacerbate that problem. The second be a fine soliition opportunity Jefferson Strict of an oversize id On a positive downtown arsa this very desirable v|ariance I take issue with is the Parking In-Lieu proposal While this might in some instances, the practicality in this case is that there is no city parking lots within reasonable walking distance. Parking along is already a problem, and it would be a shame to make it worse as a result project. note, I would like to commend the city on the many positive changes to the in recent years. A number of residences have been upgraded or built in section of town, and I would like to see that trend continue. Thank you fojr your consideration. Sincerely, Jonathan Goll 18 Gettysburi Irvine, CA 92620-3266 City of Carlsbad ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MEMORANDUM February 10, 2003 TO: Lori Rosenstein, Redevelopment FROM: Jeremy Riddle, Engineering SUBJECT: PROJECT CONDITIONS, KENT JESSE OFFICE BUILDING, RP 02-02 The Engineering Department has completed its review of the subject project. The Engineering Department is recommending that the project be approved, subject to the following conditions: General 1 Prior to hauling dirt or constmction materials to or from any proposed constmction site within this project, Developer shall apply for and obtain approval from, the City Engineer for the proposed haul route. 2 Prior to issuance of any building permit, Developer shall comply with the requirements of the City's anti-graffiti program for wall treatments if and when such a program is formally established by the City. Fees/A2reements 3 Developer shall cause property owner to execute and submit to the City Engineer for recordation the City's standard form Drainage Hold Harmless Agreement regarding drainage across the adjacent property. 4 Prior to approval of any grading or building pennits for this project, Developer shall cause Owner to give written consent to the City Engineer to the annexation of the area shown within the boundaries of the subdivision into the existing City of Carlsbad Street Lighting and Landscaping District No. 1, on a form provided by the City Engineer. Gradins 5 No grading for private improvements shall occur outside the limits of this approval unless Developer obtains, records and submits a recorded copy to the City Engineer a grading or slope easement or agreement from the owners of the affected properties. If Developer is unable to obtain the grading or slope easement, or agreement, no grading permit will be issued. In that case Developer must either apply for and obtain an amendment of this approval or modify the plans so grading will not occur outside the project and apply for and obtain a fmding of substantial conformance from both the City Engineer and Planning Director. H:\WORD\ENG_COND\ENG CONDITIONS DRAFT (REVISED 3-01-00).doc REV. 2/10/03 Page: I 6. Based upon a review of the proposed grading and the grading quantities shown on the Site Plan and preliminary grading plan, a grading permit for this project is required. Developer shall apply for and obtain a grading permit from the City Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit for the project. 7. Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, a reproducible 24" x 36", photo mylar of the site plan and preliminary grading plan reflecting the conditions as approved by the final decision making body (including any applicable Coastal Commission approvals). The reproducible shall be submitted to the City Engineer, reviewed and, if acceptable, signed by the City's project engineer and project planner prior to submittal of the building plans, fmal map, improvement or grading plans, whichever occurs first. Dedications/Improvements 8. Developer shall comply with the City's requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) pennit, latest version. Developer shall provide improvements constmcted pursuant to best management practices as referenced in the "Califomia Storm Water Best Management Practices Handbook" to reduce surface pollutants to an acceptable level prior to discharge to sensitive areas. Plans for such improvements shall be submitted to and subject to the approval of the City Engineer. Said plans shall include but not be limited to notifying prospective owners and tenants of the following: A. All owners and tenants shall coordinate efforts to establish or work with established disposal programs to remove and properly dispose of toxic and hazardous waste products. B. Toxic chemicals or hydrocarbon compounds such as gasoline, motor oil, antifreeze, solvents, paints, paint thinners, wood preservatives, and other such fluids shall not be discharged into any street, public or private, or into storm drain or storm water conveyance systems. Use and disposal of pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, insecticides, fertilizers and other such chemical treatments shall meet Federal, State, County and City requirements as prescribed in their respective containers. C. Best Management Practices shall be used to eliminate or reduce surface pollutants when planning any changes to the landscaping and surface improvements. Code Reminder The project is subject to all applicable provisions of local ordinances, including but not limited to the following: 9. Developer shall exercise special care during the constmction phase of this project to prevent offsite siltation. Planting and erosion control shall be provided in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 15.16 (the Grading Ordinance) to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks. H:\WORD\ENG_COND\ENG CONDITIONS DRAFT (REVISED 3-01-00).doc REV. 2/10/03 Page: 2 Citv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department January 13, 2003 CHRIS CONNERTON KENT JESSEE & ASSOCIATES 2075 CORTE DEL NOGAL, STE S CARLSBAD.CA 92009-1413 SUBJECT: Kent Jessee Office BIdg. (RP 02-02) APN: 203-110-29 To help expedite the processing of the permit application the following information is being provided. Once all the engineering issues have been resolved the project will be scheduled for a Design Review Board hearing. The following items will be required for the hearing: 1. Public Notification Packaoe: (Needed 3 weeks prior to hearing date.) The public notification package shall include the following information: a. A typewritten list of the names and addresses of all property owners within a 600' radius of subject property (including the applicant and/or owner). The list shall include the San Diego County Assessor's parcel number from the latest assessment rolls. b. 600' Radius Map: A map to scale not less than 1" = 200' showing each lot within 600' of the exterior boundaries of the subject property. Each of these lots shall be consecutively numbered and correspond with the property owners list. c. Two (2) separate sets of mailing labels of the property owners within a 600' radius of the subject property. The list must be typed in all CAPITAL LETTERS, left justified, void of punctuation. For any address other than single-family residence, an apartment, suite or building number must be included on a separate line. DO NOT include it in the street address line. DO NOT TYPE ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER ON LABELS. DO NOT provide addressed envelopes - PROVIDE LABELS ONLY. UNACCEPTABLE UNACCEPTABLE ACCEPTABLE Mrs. Jane Smith Mrs. Jane Smith 123 Magnolia Ave., Apt #3 123 Magnolia Ave. Carisbad, CA 92008 Apt. #3 Carisbad, CA 92008 MRS JANE SMITH APTS 123 MAGNOLIA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 2. One (1) copy of a full-sized (24" x 36") colored site plan. (Needed 2 weeks prior to hearing date.) 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 @ 3. One (1) copy of full-sized (24" x 36") colored building elevations accurately depicting the proposed mature landscaping and how it relates to the building. (Needed 2 weeks prior to hearing date.) 4. Ten (10) sets of full size plans folded to 8V2" x 11". (Needed 2 weeks prior to hearing date.) 5. One (1) set of 8y2" x 11" black and white reduced plans. (Needed 2 weeks prior to hearing date.) 6. Four (4) additional copies of the 872" xll" reduced colored building elevations. Six copies have already been submitted to staff. (Needed 2 weeks prior to hearing date.) 7. Electronic files (in jpeg format) of the colored site plan and all building elevations presented on disk or sent via e-mail to Irose©ci.carisbad.ca.us (Needed 2 weeks prior to hearing date.) If you have any questions regarding the information requested in this letter, please contact Lori Rosenstein at 760-434-2813. Sincefetyr-\ LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst c: Scott Cairns, Smith Consulting Citv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department January 6, 2002!'3 SCOTT CAIRNS SMITH CONSULTING ARCHITECTS 12220 EL CAMINO REAL STE 200 SAN DIEGO CA 92130 SUBJECT: Kent Jessee Office BIdg. (RP 02-02) APN: 203-110-29 In preparing the above referenced project for a Design Review Board public hearing 1 was informed by the Engineering staff that several of the issues outlined in our last correspondence, dated September 11, 2002, have yet to be addressed. In telephone conversations in early to mid-November, we discussed sending all requested engineering information directly to Jeremy Riddle of the Engineering Department. It was my assumption that this had been done. When I asked for final conditions from Engineering they informed me there were still outstanding issues that must be resolved before they could prepare final conditions of approval for the project. I asked Jeremy Riddle to prepare a memo outlining all remaining issues of concern. I have attached the memo for your review. With this correspondence I am also forwarding the redlined corrections I received from the Engineering Department. In addition, please answer the following questions regarding the plans submitted on November 6, 2002: 1. Besides the monument sign, where is the additional signage planned for the building? Please show all wall signs and dimensions on the building elevations. 2. Why is parking space #7 labeled as a compact space? In an effort to expedite this project I will continue to prepare the Design Review Board staff report and resolution. Once all issues are resolved we will schedule the project for a Design Review Board hearing. If you have any questions regarding the engineering comments, please contact Jeremy Riddle directly at 602-2737. All other project related questions should be directed to my office. LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst c: Debbie Fountain, Housing & Redevelopment Director Jeremy Riddle, Engineering 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 Citv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department September 11, 2002 SCOTT CAIRNS SMITH CONSULTING ARCHITECTS 12220 EL CAMINO REAL STE 200 SANDIEGO CA 92130 SUBJECT: Kent Jessee Office BIdg. (RP 02-02) APN: 203-110-29 The items requested from you eariier to make your Major Redevelopment Permit, application no. RP 02-02, complete have been received and reviewed by the Housing and Redevelopment Department along with other appropriate City departments. It has been determined that the application is now complete for processing. Although the initial processing of your application may have already begun, the technical acceptance date is acknowledged by the date of this communication. Please note that although the application is now considered complete, there may be issues that could be discovered during project review and/or environmental review. Any issues should be resolved prior to scheduling the project for public hearing. In addition, the City may request, in the course of processing the application that you clarify, amplify, correct, or otherwise, supplement the basic information required for the application. To assist in expediting the processing of the application a list of remaining issues of concern and information needed for clarification has been attached. These issues must be addressed prior to staff making a recommendation on the project. Since these changes will require changes to the plans, please submit 6 sets of the revised plans to the Housing and Redevelopment Department for final review and preparation of final conditions. If you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application, please contact my office at (760) 434-2813. Sinc< LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst c: Debbie Fountain, Housing & Redevelopment Director Jeremy Riddle, Engineering Greg Fisher, Planning Pat Kelley, Building Gregory Ryan, Fire Larry Black, Planning 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 @ ISSUES OF CONCERN No. RP02-02 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.) HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT: 1. Please add the following information to the site plan: a. With the reduced building size the required parking totals 35.4 parking spaces based on gross building area. Whenever there is a fractional unit the number of parking spaces is rounded up. Please show the required parking as 36 spaces and revise the remainder of the table accordingly. b. Depth of parking spaces 1 -7 and 27-31. If spaces 27-31 are compact spaces please label as such. Standard parking spaces has a minimum width of 8'-6" and measures 170 square feet. c. Show back-up distance inside covered parking area. 1. On the civil site plan the building to the north is incorrectly labeled as 2-story. Revise to 1-story and label all adjacent uses (i.e. commercial office, single family residential, multi- family apartments, etc.) 2. Provide a graphic showing how open space area was calculated. 3. Revise sign plan. The maximum height of a monument sign is 5 feet, including any base. Maximum sign area is 24 square feet. Show dimensions of sign area. 4. In Land Use District 7 any lot proposed for non-residential development, which adjoins an existing residential lot, shall have a solid masonry wall installed along common lot lines. Please incorporate the required masonry wall into the plans. 5. Project Design: The proposed project requires a variance to exceed the height limit and findings must be made to grant participation in the parking in-lieu fee program. In both cases, issues of neighborhood compatibility, consistency with the land use district, consistency with the goals and objectives of the Village Master Plan and Design Manual, and exceptional building and site design are critical to granting the requests. As the project is currently designed Housing & Redevelopment staff cannot recommend approval of either request. We realize the site has significant development constraints due to the narrow width of the lot and the single access from Jefferson Street. However, the proposed three-story structure will appear monolithic compared to the surrounding area. Land Use District 7 was specifically intended to promote smaller scale office buildings mixed in with the residential uses in the neighborhood, which is why the maximum height is set at 35 feet. This is how District 7 differs from District 2 located further south. The proposed project appears to be too much building for the site. Staff is recommending the size of the project be reduced to be more compatible with the surrounding area and the goals and objectives set forth in the Village Redevelopment Master Plan for District 7. As one alternative to accomplishing this goal. Redevelopment staff would consider looking at a site design which includes a two-story office building on the back of the lot with parking and extensive landscaping along the street frontage. While the Village Design Guidelines encourage the building to have a strong street presence, given the limited width of the lot this seems like a more optimal design than the proposed three-story structure along Jefferson St. For quesfions regarding Housing & Redevelopment Department comments, please contact Lori Rosenstein at 760-434-2813. ENGINEERING: Staff has conducted a review of the project for engineering issues of concern. Engineering issues must be resolved or adequately addressed prior to staff making a determination on the proposed project. All items listed with a © are listed as "repeat" issues that were previously listed, but were not addressed on this submittal. All other items are a result of the revised plans. The issues are: 1. © The legal description for this project is comprised of a portion of two lots, but there is no history of a lot line adjustment listed in Schedule B of the preliminary title report. Unless sufficient information can be provided to staff indicating the legal status of the lot, this project will be conditioned to prepare, submit and receive approval of a certificate of compliance to certify the lot is one parcel of land, (refer to attached requirements that establish a legal lot). 2. © This project qualifies as a "priority" project pursuant to new regulations issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Please clarify how this project minimizes impervious area and maximizes infiltration to the maximum extend practical for storm run-off. One suggestion may be for the water discharged from the sump pump to be discharged over a grass swale along the side of the structure to allow for some infiltration before being discharged to City right-of-way. 3. © Provide a letter from the waste removal service stating they will be able to serve this project. We have concems with the trash bin located in the lower parking lot and how a refuse truck will gain access to dump the bin. 4. ® Address how an emergency overflow can be incorporated into the project since a sump is being designed (e.g.: 2"' sump pump or battery backup to cover power outages). 5. On the site plan, remove the stairs and benches out of the City right-of-way. These are private facilities and should located completely on private property. 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 Jeremy Riddle in the Engineering Department at 760-602-2737. City of Carlsbad ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MEMORANDUM March 26, 2002 TO: Lori Rosenstein, Redevelopment FROM: Jeremy Riddle, Engineering SUBJECT: FIRST REVIEW OF PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING ON APN 203-110-29, RP 02-02 The Engineering Department has completed a review of the above subject. We have reviewed the application for completeness and have determined that the application and plans submitted for the project are incomplete and unsuitable for continued review due to the following incomplete Items: Incomplete Items 1. Provide a preliminary soils report that provides recommendations related to the proposed project. The report should include address approximate limits of remedial grading, if required. 2. On the preliminary grading plan, provide additional spot elevations or topography at least 25-feet outside the property line. This information should clearly demonstrate existing drainage patterns and whether raising the rear property line will affect neighboring properties. Additionally, staff has conducted a review of the project for engineering issues of concern. Engineering issues, which must be resolved or adequately addressed prior to staff making a determination on the proposed project, are as follows: Engineering Issues of Concern 1. This project triggers a grading permit and will be conditioned to obtain one. 2. The legal description for this project is comprised of a portion of two lots, but there is no history of a lot line adjustment listed in Schedule B of the preliminary title report. Unless sufficient information can be provided to staff indicating the legal status of the lot, this project will be conditioned to prepare, submit and receive approval of a certificate of compliance to certify the lot is one parcel of land, (refer to attached requirements that establish a legal lot). 3. This project qualifies as a "priority" project pursuant to new regulations issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Please clarify how this project minimizes impervious area and maximizes infiltration to the maximum extend practical for storm run-off. One suggestion may be for the water discharged from the sump pump to be discharged over a grass swale along the side of the Kent Jessee March 26, 2002 Page 2 of 2 structure to allow for some infiltration before being discharged to City right-of-way. 4. Provide a profile of the proposed driveway. Callout vertical curves as necessary to ensure vehicular maneuverability. 5. Provide a letter from the waste removal service stating they will be able to serve this project. We have concerns with the trash bin located in the lower parking lot and how a refuse truck will gain access to dump the bin. 6. Revise the site plan to list the correct ADT (traffic), EDU (sewer), and GPD (water) required or generated by this project. Refer to the redlines for clarification on this matter. 7. Delete the term "preliminary" as noted on the site plan. 8. Address how an emergency overflow can be incorporated into the project since a sump is being designed (e.g.: 2"^ sump pump or battery backup to cover power outages). 9. Revise the site plan and preliminary grading plan to incorporate stalls at least 10- feet wide when located next to solid walls. This is required so vehicles may open their doors. 10. A redlined check print is enclosed for the applicants use in making the requested revisions. This check print must be returned with the plan revisions to facilitate continued staff review. If you have any questions, please call me at 602-2737. Attachment c: File Citv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department March 26, 2002 SCOTT CAIRNS SMITH CONSULTING ARCHITECTS 12220 EL CAMINO REAL STE 200 SANDIEGO CA 92130 SUBJECT: Kent Jessee Office BIdg. (RP 02-02) APN: 203-110-29 Thank you for applying for a Land Use Permit in the City of Carisbad. The Housing and Redevelopment Department, together with other appropriate City departments, has reviewed your Major Redevelopment Permit, application no. RP02-02, as to its completeness for processing. The application is incomplete, as submitted. Attached are two lists. The first list is information that must be submitted to complete your application. This list of items must be submitted directly to the Housing & Redevelopment Office. All list items must be submitted simultaneously and a copy of this list must be included with your submittal. No processing of your application can occur until the applications are determined to be complete. The second list includes issues of concern to staff, which must be addressed prior to staff making a recommendation on the project. When all required materials are submitted to the Redevelopment Office, the City has an additional thirty (30) days to make a determination of completeness. If the applications are determined to be complete, processing for a decision on the application will be initiated. In addition, please note that you have six months from the date the application was initially filed, February 21, 2002, to submit the required information. Failure to submit the materials necessary to determine your application complete shall be deemed to constitute withdrawal of the application. If an application is withdrawn or deemed withdrawn, a new appiication must be submitted. Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sine LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst c: Debbie Fountain, Housing & Redevelopment Director Jeremy Riddle, Engineering Greg Fisher, Planning Pat Kelley, Building Gregory Ryan, Fire Larry Black, Planning 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 @ UST OF ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION No. RP02-02 Staff has completed a review of the subject project for application completeness. The application and plans submitted for this project are incomplete at this time. The following additional items are required to find the application complete: (Please note, the issues are listed under the department which identified them as an area of concern.) HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT: 1. Please add the following information to the site plan: a. Under application type, label as "Major Redevelopment Permit No. RP02-02"; b. Label vehicular back up distance on the rear portion of the lot; c. Label dimensions of compact spaces; d. Label compact spaces; e. Number the parking spaces; f. In the parking area on the north side of the building one of the parking spaces located between the equipment room and the elevator measures 8.5 feet wide by 19 feet deep, which is too small and must be modified. g. Required parking equals 35.7 parking spaces based on gross building area. Whenever there is a fractional unit it is rounded up. Please show the required parking as 36 spaces and revise the remainder of the table accordingly. h. Show location of structures and label their current use and number of stories on all adjoining lots. i. Label right-of-way width for Jefferson Street. 2. Provide a sign plan showing conceptual signage for the building along with a summary table with the following information: a. Total building street frontage; b. Total sign area allowed (1 square foot of signage per linear foot of building frontage); c. Total sign area proposed. 3. Submit a construction materials board and color samples. ENGINEERING: 1. Provide a preliminary soils report that provides recommendations related to the proposed project. The report should include address approximate limits of remedial grading, if required. 2. On the preliminary grading plan, provide additional spot elevations or topography at least 25-feet outside the property line. This information should cleariy demonstrate existing drainage patterns and whether raising the rear property line will affect neighboring properties. ISSUES OF CONCERN No. RP 02-02 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.) HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT: 1. 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. ENGINEERING: 1. This project triggers a grading permit and will be conditioned to obtain one. 2. The legal description for this project is comprised of a portion of two lots, but there is no history of a lot line adjustment listed in Schedule B of the preliminary title report. Unless sufficient information can be provided to staff indicating the legal status of the lot, this project will be conditioned to prepare, submit and receive approval of a certificate of compliance to certify the lot is one parcel of land, (refer to attached requirements that establish a legal lot). 3. This project qualifies as a "priority" project pursuant to new regulations issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Please clarify how this project minimizes impervious area and maximizes infiltration to the maximum extend practical for storm run-off. One suggestion may be for the water discharged from the sump pump to be discharged over a grass swale aiong the side of the structure to allow for some infiltration before being discharged to City right-of-way. 4. Provide a profile of the proposed driveway. Callout vertical curves as necessary to ensure vehicular maneuverability. 5. Provide a letter from the waste removal service stating they will be able to serve this project. We have concerns with the trash bin located in the lower parking lot and how a refuse truck will gain access to dump the bin. 6. Revise the site plan to list the correct ADT (traffic), EDU (sewer), and GPD (water) required or generated by this project. Refer to the redlines for clarification on this matter. 7. Delete the term "preliminary" as noted on the site plan. 8. Address how an emergency overflow can be incorporated into the project since a sump is being designed (e.g.: 2'^ sump pump or battery backup to cover power outages). 9. Revise the site plan and preliminary grading plan to incorporate stalls at least 10-feet wide when located next to solid walls. This is required so vehicles may open their doors. 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 Jeremy Riddle in the Engineering Department at 760-602-2737. FIRE: The Fire Department's concern is the ability to access all areas of this proposed structure pursuant to CFC Sec.902 (Fire Department Access). As proposed, the sub-grade parking area will inhibit, if not prohibit, fire vehicle access. Therefore, additional protective measures will be required. Additional protective measures will include, but may not be limited to, the following: 1. An Automatic Fire-Extinguishing System shall be installed throughout the project to include the sub-grade parking area; and 2. An Automatic Fire-Detection System shall be installed. Please add the appropriate notes to the site plan identifying how these concerns will be addressed. For questions regarding Fire Department comments, please contact Deputy Fire Marshall Gregory Ryan at 760-602-4663. LANDSCAPE PLANCHECK: Landscape plan check comments have been included on the enclosed redlined Landscape Concept Plan. The 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 landscape comments, please contact Larry Black in the Planning Department at 760-602-4603. BUILDING: The Building Department does not have any comments on the proposed project. City of Carlsbad ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MEMORANDUM January 6, 2002 TO: Lori Rosenstein, Redevelopment FROM: Jeremy Riddle, Engineering SUBJECT: THIRD REVIEW OF PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING ON APN 203-110-29, RP 02-02 The Engineering Department has completed a review of the above subject. Staff has conducted a review of the project for engineering issues of concern. Engineering issues must be resolved or adequately addressed prior to staff making a determination on the proposed project. All items listed with a © are listed as "repeat" issues that were previously listed, but were not addressed on this submittal. All other items are a result of the revised plans. The issues are: Engineering Issues of Concern 1. © The legal description for this project is comprised of a portion of two lots, but there is no history of a lot line adjustment listed in Schedule B of the preliminary title report. Unless sufficient information can be provided to staff indicating the legal status of the lot, this project will be conditioned to prepare, submit and receive approval of a certificate of compliance to certify the lot is one parcel of land. You responded that the civil enoineer is researching. Please inform staff if you want this issue to be conditioned as part of the project or if you wish to resolve it before it goes to hearing. 2. © This project qualifies as a "priority" project pursuant to new regulations issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board per Order 2001-01. Please clarify how this project minimizes impervious area and maximizes infiltration to the maximum extend practical for storm run-off. You responded that fossil filters would be installed. Just /nstalling fossil filters on a project does not meet the intent of storm water quality regulations. Specifically, it does not address minimizing impervious area, or allowing percolation of storm water back to the soil. One suggestion may be for the water discharged from the sump pump to be discharged over a grass swale along the side of the structure to allow for some infiltration before being discharged to City right-of- way. 3. © Provide a letter from the waste removal service stating they will be able to serve this project. We have concerns with the trash bin located in the lower parking lot and how a refuse truck will gain access to dump the bin. You indicated 'lo follow". Staff anticipates this will be provided on the next submittal. 4. ® Address how an emergency overflow can be incorporated into the project since the project is designed with a sump (e.g.: 2"^ sump pump or battery backup to cover power outages). You indicated "battery backup added, see civil". Staff could not find a revision to the exhibits to demonstrate this effort was made. Please inform staff which exhibit has the added information. 5. © On sheet A-5, revise the plans to indicate the existing grade on sections B-B and Kent Jessee January 6, 2002 Page 2 of 2 C-C. This information demonstrates the approximate excavation involved with the project. 6. © On sheet A-5, revise the plans to indicate the property line locations on sections B- B and C-C. 7. ® The soils report indicates that remedial grading is anticipated at least 5-feet beyond the building foundations. Please clarify if offsite remedial grading is required along either the north or south property line. If so, please add callouts stating that offsite temporary grading and construction easements will be required as part of the project. Refer to the redlines for clarification of this matter. 8. The exhibits were revised to include a new 8-foot high wall along the westerly property line, as measured from the adjacent property. This design does not meet infill grading standards. The wall should be revised to retain up to 3-feet with a 3-foot high screen wall on top of that, resulting in a 6-foot maximum high wall, as measured form the adjacent property. Refer to the redlines for clarification of this matter. 9. Revise the exhibits so the typical cross sections on the preliminary grading plan state 6-foot maximum, not 6-foot minimum. 10. Address all redlines as noted on the returned plans. A redlined check print is enclosed for the applicants use in making the requested revisions. This check print must be returned with the plan revisions to facilitate continued staff review. If you have any questions, please call me at 602-2737. Attachment c: File