Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRP 04-23; Carlsbad Village Townhomes; Redevelopment Permits (RP) (2)Community & Economic Development www.carlsbadca.gov February 12, 2013 Jim Holcomb 4444 Adams Street Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: CT 04-24xl/RP 04-23xl-CARLSBAD VILLAGE TOWNHOMES Mr. Holcomb: You recently inquired about the expiration date of the Major Redevelopment Permit (RP 04-23xl) and Tentative Tract Map (CT 04-21xl) for the property you own at 2683-2687 Roosevelt Street. A letter was sent to you on January 10, 2011 regarding the expiration date for the Major Redevelopment Permit and Tentative Tract Map. The letter had. stated that the expiration date of the Major Redevelopment Permit and Tentative Tract Map was February 6, 2013. On July 13, 2011, the Governor approved Assembly Bill No. 208 which extended the expiration date by 24 months of any approved tentative map that was not expired as of July 13, 2011 and will expire prior to January 1, 2014. Because the Tentative Tract Map had an expiration date of February 6, 2013, it and the associated Major Redevelopment Permit qualify for an automatic 24 month extension, making the new expiration date February 6, 2015. There is nothing required of you to keep the Major Redevelopment Permit and Tentative Tract Map active. · If you have any questions regarding the information contained in this letter, please contact me at (760) 602-4631. Sincerely, fi~ Assistant Planner c: File · · ·. Planning Division ~-1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 T 760-602-4600 F 760-602-8559 ® January 1 0, 2011 JIM HOLCOMB 4444 ADAMS STREET CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Re: Permit Extension Dear Jim: e Cit You recently inquired about the expiration dates for the Tentative Tract Map (CT 04-21x1) and Major Redevelopment Permit (RP 04-23x1 ). On March 18, 2008, the Housing and Redevelopment Commission granted a two-year extension of your original Tentative Tract Map (CT 04-21) and Major Redevelopment Permit (RP 04-23) with a new expiration date of February 6, 2010. However, due to the economic conditions, the state passed SB 1185, which provided a one-year extension to all tentative map approvals that were still valid on July 15, 2008 and would have expired before January 1, 2011 making the new expiration date February 6, 2011. In addition, the state passed AB 333, which provided a two-year extension to all tentative map approvals that would have expired before January 1, 2012, making the new expiration date February 6, 2013. When SB 1185 was passed on July 15, 2008, the City of Carlsbad subsequently passed an ordinance to automatically extend any city-issued permits to run concurrent with the extended life of a tentative map. The city also extended any city-issued permits to run longer if the state legislature passed any new laws further extending the one year period provided for in SB 1185 (CMC 21.12.110 (a)(2)(i)(ii). The state legislature did so when it extended tentative maps for an additional two years through AB 333. Therefore the Major Redevelopment Permit (RP 04-23x1) also has an expiration date of February 6, 2013. I hope this correspondence answers the questions you had related to the expiration date of the entitlements on your property. If you have any questions regarding the information contained in this letter, please contact my office at (760) 434-2813. Austin Silva Assistant Planner 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 March 31, 2008 ROBERT ENRIGHT 1213 S. PACIFIC ST. OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 • SUBJECT: Carlsbad Village Townhomes Extension (RP 04-23x1/CT 04-21x1) Dear Robert: As you are aware, on March 18, 2008 the Housing and Redevelopment Commission conditionally approved an extension for Major Redevelopment Permit No. RP 04-23 a and Tentative Tract No. 04-21 for property located at 2683 & 2687 Roosevelt Street. Enclosed please find a signed copy of the final resolutions of approval for the proposed project. These resolutions contain the conditions of approval for the project. Your next step is to obtain the appropriate grading and building permits to construct the proposed project. Please note many of the conditions of approval must be satisfied prior to the issuance of building permit. If you have any questions and/or comments regarding this correspondence, please contact my office at (760) 434-2813. AUSTIN SILVA Assistant Planner Enclosures 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2335 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 (!) ,• August 10, 2005 DAVID LEE SOANES 6378 PASEO POTRERO CARLSBAD, CA 92009 SUBJECT: CARLSBAD VILLAGE TOWNHOMES -2683 & 2687 ROOSEVELT STREET - (RP 04-23/CT 04-21) The purpose of this letter is to address issues of concern raised by the Housing & Redevelopment Department following a review of the revised plans received on August 5, 2005. The issues of concern are attached for your review. These issues must be addressed prior to staff making a formal recommendation on the project. Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincerely, CLIFF JONES Assistant Planner Enclosures 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 I ISSUES OF CONCERN No. RP04-23 Staff has completed a review of the subject project for application completeness. The following items need to be resolved or adequately addressed prior to formulating a recommendation on the proposed project. Please submit to the Housing and Redevelopment Department two (2) copies of the revised plans showing the following information: (Please note, the issues are listed under the department which identified them as an area of concern.) HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT: 1. Please remove the word "net" on sheet 3, 5 & 8. 2. Under the Required Permits section on sheet 1, please fix numbering. 3. Dwelling units per acre is 19.4 not 19. Please fix sheet 2. 4. Engineering does not support the roll down gate identified under the archway. In order to permit a gate a car must be able to make a three point turn in the driveway and a minimum of 20 feet of driveway (excluding public right of way) is necessary. Please remove the roll down gate and modify the plans accordingly. 5. Staff has a concern with proposed archway signage. The archway signage is interpreted as pole signage and is therefore not permitted. Please remove the text from the archway and the archway can be considered an architectural feature. Staff suggest monument signage be proved if signage for the townhomes is necessary. July 19, 2005 DAVID LEE SOANES 6378 PASEO POTRERO CARLSBAD, CA 92009 SUBJECT: CARLSBAD VILLAGE TOWNHOMES -2683 & 2687 ROOSEVELT STREET - (RP 04-23/CT 04-21) The purpose of this letter is to address issues of concern raised by the Housing & redevelopment Department following a review of the revised plans. The issues of concern are attached for your review. These issues must be addressed prior to staff making a formal recommendation on the project. Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincerely, ~~- CLIFF JONES Assistant Planner Encles1::1res 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 <!) LIST OF ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION No. RP04-23 Staff has completed a review of the subject project for application completeness. The following items need to be resolved or adequately addressed prior to formulating a recommendation on the proposed project. Please submit to the Housing and Redevelopment Department one (1) copy of the revised plans showing the following information: (Please note, the issues are listed under the department which identified them as an area of concern.) HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT: 1. Please correct zoning from "ZR" to "VR" on all sheets. 2. Please remove the word "net" on all sheets. 3. Please remove Coastal Development Permit from the Required Permits section. 4. Dwelling units per acre is 19.4 not 19. Please fix the plans accordingly. 5. Please note that the Bed & Breakfast use requires one parking space per bedroom and two parking spaces for the Bed & Breakfast Resident Quarters. Therefore please remove the text that specifies 5 spaces required (since only 4 are required as there are only 4 bedrooms to be used as a Bed & Breakfast). Refer to attael=led reeliAee ~lal'ls. 6. Site plan shows a frontyard setback of 5 feet but tentative map shows only 4.5 feet. Please revise the tentative map. 7. Staff has a concern with proposed archway signage. Please indicate how archway is part of the main building and provide a sample of roll down doors. April 15, 2005 DAVID LEE SOANES 6378 PASEO POTRERO CARLSBAD, CA 92009 SUBJECT: CARLSBAD VILLAGE TOWNHOMES -2683 & 2687 ROOSEVELT STREET - (RP 04-23/CT 04-21) The purpose of this letter is to address issues of concern raised by the Engineering Department following a review of the revised plans. The issues of concern are attached for your review. These issues must be addressed prior to staff making a formal recommendation on the project. Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincerely, CLIFF JONES Assistant Planner Enclosures 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 @ April 15, 2005 TO: FROM: VIA: RE: • CITY OF CARLSBAD ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT LAND USE REVIEW CLIFF JONES, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT Glen Van Peski, Consultant Project Engineer JOHN MAASHOFF, ACTING SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER ISSUES REVIEW CARLSBAD VILLAGE TOWNHOMES CT 04·23/RP 04-21 The Engineering Department has completed our review of the above-referenced project for application completeness and has determined that the application and plans submitted for this project are complete and suitable for a complete review. Staff has identified the issues listed below which must be fully addressed prior to recommending the project for approval. ISSUES 1. Revise the Drainage Study based on the current San Diego County Hydrology Manual. See redlined comments on the calculations. It appears that onsite detention may be required to avoid increasing runoff onto the adjacent property. 2. See minor redlined comments on the Preliminary Storm Water Management Plan. 3. There are no further comments on the Tentative Map and Site Plan sheets, but if onsite detention is necessary, it should be shown on these sheets. Red-lined check prints (Tentative Map, Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan, Preliminary SWMP, Drainage Study) are enclosed for the applicants use in making the requested revisions. All check prints should be returned with the next submittal to facilitate continued staff review. If you or the applicant have any questions, please either see or call me at 760-720-0500, or email me at gvanp@ci.carlsbad.ca.us. Glen K. Van Peski, P .E. Consultant Project Engineer-Development Services en c. ----~--------------- February 2, 2005 DAVID LEE SOANES 6378 PASEO POTRERO CARLSBAD, CA 92009 e • c i t X.:,J2.! •.• $iJ:I1~.Rfmg SUBJECT: CARLSBAD VILLAGE TOWNHOMES-2683 & 2687 ROOSEVELT STREET- (RP 04-23/CT 04-21) The above-mentioned application was determined incomplete on January 25, 2005. The attached list includes all items necessary to complete the application and/or clarify information on the plans. This list of items must be submitted directly to Housing and Redevelopment Department. All list items must be submitted simultaneously and a copy of this list must be included with your submittals. No processing of your application can occur until the application is determined to be complete. When all required materials are submitted the City has 30 days to make a determination of completeness. If the application is 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, October 21, 2004, to either resubmit the application or submit the required information. Failure to resubmit the application or 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 application 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. Sincerely, 4?'~ CLIFF JONES Assistant Planner Enclosure c: Glen Van Penski, Engineering 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 (i) ( LIST OF ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION No. RP04-23 Staff has completed a review of the subject project for application completeness. The following items need to be resolved or adequately addressed prior to formulating a recommendation on the proposed project. Please submit to the Housing and Redevelopment Department two (2) copies of the revised plans showing the following information: (Please note, the issues are listed under the department which identified them as an area of concern.) HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT: 1. Staff did not receive a front elevation of the proposed project that depicts the proposed mature landscaping. 2. Provide the dimension of all wall heights within setback areas. 3. Please be aware that in accordance with the lnclusionary Housing Ordinance for the City of Carlsbad one {1) affordable housing unit will be required to be provided for on site. FUTURE ITEMS REQUIRED PRIOR TO HEARING DATE As soon as all issues are resolved to the satisfaction of all departments the project will be scheduled for a Design Review Board hearing. To help expedite the processing of the permit application the following information is being provided. The following items will be required for the hearing: A. Public Notification Package: (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 123 Magnolia Ave., Apt #3 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Mrs. Jane Smith 123 Magnolia Ave. Apt. #3 Carlsbad, CA 92008 MRS JANE SMITH APT3 123 MAGNOLIA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 B. One (1) copy of a full-sized (24" x 36") colored site plan. (Needed 2 weeks prior to hearing date.) C. 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.) D. Ten {10) sets of full size plans folded to 81h'' x 11". (Needed 2 weeks prior to hearing date.) E. One {1) set of 8W' x 11" black and white reduced plans. (Needed 2 weeks prior to hearing date.) F. Electronic files (in jpeg format) of the colored site plan and all building elevations presented on disk or sent via e-mail to cjones@ci.carlsbad.ca.us (Needed 2 weeks prior to hearing date.) · G. Please submit an 8W' x 11 construction material board and color samples showing roofing, exterior walls, trim, etc. For questions regarding Housing & Redevelopment Department comments, please contact Cliff Jones at 760-434-2813. ENGINEERING: INCOMPLETE ITEMS 1. Label existing easements. Note 06 on map says "no easements", revise to indicate that easements are shown. 2. Show cross-sections to depict how the project relates to surrounding properties. Provide three separate cross-sections. Generic cross-section shows a 4.5-foot wall on top of a 2 to 4-foot retaining wall. Numbers on TM show up to a 6-foot high fence atop a 5.5-foot retaining wall! Sections should be specific for the side of the property they portray, and show the worst case for that side. 3. Provide a preliminary Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) per City standards. The submitted report appears to be have been prepared as a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for construction activities, but this project is below the 1 ac. threshold for requiring a SWPPP. The City Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) requires that the SWMP (referred to as Water Quality Technical Reports in the SUSMP), are prepared by a registered civil engineer. Project is not defined as a "priority project" requiring enhanced permanent Best Management Practice (BMP) requirements, but it does need to meet the standard permanent BMP requirements. ISSUES 1. Show individual sewer pumps for each proposed unit (this can be by note). 2. Correct the Districts providing service to the project as redlined on the tentative map print. 3. Obtain letter from adjoining property owner acknowledging the wall and fence combination in lieu of continuing the existing drainage pattern. As shown on the tentative map, the existing grade of Roosevelt Street is only 0.25%, which has very little capacity to carry stormwater. 4. Remove the proposed curbing within the public right-of-way. Show a standard driveway or alley-type driveway. Engineering staff does not support the obstruction to drainage flow and traffic, and the increased liability and maintenance issues of the proposed entrance with curbs into the public right of way. 5. Provide a cross-section showing the driveway into the basement, with grades, lengths of vertical curves, etc. The cross-section provided is not to scale. Please make the cross- section to scale, preferably with an exaggerated vertical scale to allow accurate analysis. Show the location of the proposed right of way, so it is clear that the vertical curves occur outside of the public right of way. The cross-section does not have to be shown on the preliminary grading plan or tentative map, it may be submitted as a separate document. 6. The submitted drainage report does not include calculations done in accordance with the San Diego County Hydrology Manual. Please submit calculations prepared by a registered civil engineer, to show that either no increase in runoff will be created, or the existing drainage system to the north can handle the proposed increase. Submit three copies, signed and sealed. Address the issue of diversion of drainage, since the site previously drained to the west, and is proposed to now drain to the east. Please be advised, additional items of concern may be identified after requested information has been provided. Red-lined check prints (Tentative Map, Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan, WPCP, Drainage Study/SWMP) are enclosed for the applicants use in making the requested revisions. All check prints should be returned with the next submittal to facilitate continued staff review. For questions regarding Engineering Department comments please contact Glen Van Peski at 760-720-0500, or email him at gvanp@ci.carlsbad.ca.us. CITY OF CARLSBAD ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT LAND USE REVIEW January 25, 2005 TO: CLIFF JONES, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT FROM: Glen Van Peski, Consultant Project Engineer VIA: JOHN MAASHOFF, ACTING SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER RE: ISSUES REVIEW CARLSBAD VILLAGE TOWNHOMES CT 04-23/RP 04-21 The Engineering Department has completed our review of the above-referenced project for application completeness and has determined that the application and plans submitted for this project are incomplete and unsuitable for a complete review. Staff has identified some issues that are listed below. Additional issues of concern may be identified on subsequent reviews with more complete information. INCOMPLETE ITEMS 1. Label existing easements. Note 06 on map says "no easements", revise to indicate that easements are shown. 2. Show cross-sections to depict how the project relates to surrounding properties. Provide three separate cross-sections. Generic cross-section shows a 4.5-foot wall on top of a 2 to 4-foot retaining wall. Numbers on TM show up to a 6-foot high fence atop a 5.5-foot retaining wall! Sections should be specific for the side of the property they portray, and show the worst case for that side. 3. Provide a preliminary Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) per City standards. The submitted report appears to be have been prepared as a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for construction activities, but this project is below the 1 ac. threshold for requiring a SWPPP. The City Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) requires that the SWMP (referred to as Water Quality Technical Reports in the SUSMP), are prepared by a registered civil engineer. Project is not defined as a "priority project" requiring enhanced permanent Best Management Practice (BMP) requirements, but it does need to meet the standard permanent BMP requirements. ISSUES 1. Show individual sewer pumps for each proposed unit (this can be by note). 2. Correct the Districts providing service to the project as redlined on the tentative map print. 3. Obtain letter from adjoining property owner acknowledging the wall and fence combination in lieu of continuing the existing drainage pattern. As shown on the tentative map, the existing grade of Roosevelt Street is only 0.25%, which has very little e e capacity to carry stormwater. 4. Remove the proposed curbing within the public right-of-way. Show a standard driveway or alley-type driveway. Engineering staff does not support the obstruction to drainage flow and traffic, and the increased liability and maintenance issues of the proposed entrance with curbs into the public right of way. 5. Provide a cross-section showing the driveway into the basement, with grades, lengths of vertical curves, etc. The cross-section provided is not to scale. Please make the cross- section to scale, preferably with an exaggerated vertical scale to allow accurate analysis. Show the location of the proposed right of way, so it is clear that the vertical curves occur outside of the public right of way. The cross-section does not have to be shown on the preliminary grading plan or tentative map, it may be submitted as a separate document. 6. The submitted drainage report does not include calculations done in accordance with the San Diego County Hydrology Manual. Please submit calculations prepared by a registered civil engineer, to show that either no increase in runoff will be created, or the existing drainage system to the north can handle the proposed increase. Submit three copies, signed and sealed. Address the issue of diversion of drainage, since the site previously drained to the west, and is proposed to now drain to the east. Please be advised, additional items of concern may be identified after requested information has been provided. Red-lined check prints (Tentative Map, Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan, WPCP, Drainage Study/SWMP) are enclosed for the applicants use in making the requested revisions. All check prints should be returned with the next submittal to facilitate continued staff review. If you or the applicant have any questions, please either see or call me at 760-720-0500, or email me at gvanp@ci.carlsbad.ca.us. Glen K. Van Peski, P.E. Consultant Project Engineer-Development Services en c. . -6378.Paseo Potrero · Carlsbad, California 9?-Q~,J. ~.1q~1. ··~ , . .., phone: 760.476.0933 · fax: 760.476.0937 · emcVk itls#td@eartJlliiikf.net 05 January 2005 Cliff Jones, Assistant Planner City of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite 8 Carlsbad, CA 92008 -2389 ZCOS JAN -l P 3: 0 I r> :·:f c~ , .. , · !_ :·· -~-~ ·-.~; t~~-:~::.:~ i .>~ ... · ~~ ',· :~· -~·. ~-.~ ~ r [:~f._;~ 1 i .E.-:T re: response to comments, RP 04-23/ CT 04-21 Dear Cliff: We are resubmitting herewith five revised sets of plans that address the Staff letter dated 19 November 2004 regarding completeness items and issues of concern. For your convenience, this letter has attached individual pages of responses per Department of review that address each item as referenced in your letter to us. We wish to thank all staff members for taking the time to meet with us and review the issues so that we could be precise in ()ur responses. It is a pleasure to be working with you and we look forward to your next review Very Sincerely Yours, David Lee Soanes, Principal Architect I Landscape Architect I Land Planner David Lee Soanes, Ud., a California Corporation architecture · golf course architecture · land planning · civil engineering construction management · landscape architecture · interior design Carlsbad Village Town homes RP 04-23 I CT 04-21 Housing & Redevelopment Department Cliff Jones (760.434.2813) The following is a reiteration of the Design Principles that have been used in the development of the project, pursuant to the Guidelines found in the Redevelopment District Design Manuals, and how the design respects the ideas: 1. Site Planning: * * * * * * * Project provides a variety of setbacks with informal character. A low sitable planting wall attaches to the street sidewalk. There are no drive-thru service areas. Project minimizes privacy loss with courtyards; trash areas are below in the basement. Courtyards and landscape "walk-streets" provide pleasant approaches to the front entries on the south & north. Abundance of landscaping on all sides of the structure. Cluster of town homes with multiple courtyards offer building variety and appearance of individual structures within a fully landscaped green space perimeter. 2 Parking and Access: * * * * * * Paving limited by the use of central drive to maximize landscape. No parking in front setback area. Only one curb cut for drive. Ample landscaping between sidewalk and structure. No ground floor parking; parking below grade in ~asement. Entry drive with colored concrete and decorative banding. 3 Building Forms: * * * * Variety and diversity in building form with multiple recesses, with varied roof lines, turrets, bay windows, porches, and brick chimneys. Second story steps back from first story along street facade; balconies and reverse gables provided for interest Building cut out with multiple courtyards and projections. Classic two-story over basement design. 4 Roof Forms: * * * * Gable roofs with 7 in 12 pitch or greater at turrets. Simulated slate roofing in charcoal color. Mechanical equipment screened below parapet at upper roof. No mansard roofs proposed. 5 Building Facades: * * * * * * * * * * Facades are visually friendly and inviting. All sides of the structure given equal weight for visual character; visual interest on all four primary sides, as well as in the courtyards and entries. Windows and sliding glass doors are varied and integrated. Balcony, trellis, column, bay window, planter box details throughout with recessed entries and roof overhangs I integral gutters. Entryways are distinctive and varied. Window trims, wood siding and brick veneer add interest and scale to all facades. Building materials are sensitive to and respect adjacent properties Wood siding and stucco varied to differentiate each townhome. No tinted or reflective glass used; No awnings proposed. Color palette and materials integrated on all facades. 6 Commercial (does not apply) 7 Residential: * * * * * * * * * * * * * Front entry gardens provided. Units 1 & 6 located near front property lines & entries oriented to the street; concrete entry steps on grade attach to sidewalk. Front entry porches provided. Windows looking out to the street from Units 1 & 6. The color scheme are simple earthtones and contrasting trims. Wood railings, stone wall pediment details. Village "cottage" form, scale and character used throughout. Landscaped setback and low stone planter walls provided along Roosevelt Street Sidewalk. Gracious open views to landscaped walk-streets from Roosevelt to west along north and south side of structure. Parking provided in basement below grade, only one access with roll-up security gate. Parking drive colored concrete with decorative banding. Quality cedar fences atop beige split-face concrete block walls. Structure is visually separated into several smaller components. We are complying with the 5 ft street dedication per Engineering that will retain the 5 ft sidewalk and the 5 ft landscape planting area in the front yard setback. This will result in a minimum 2.5 ft setback at limited portions of the front of the building at the first floor, and a 5 ft minimum setback at the second floor. The true front setback average is 15.1 ft as you account for the 11 ft depth of the recessed porches, the 9 ft depth to the entry doors, and the 45 ft depth of the entry drive as they pocket into the building form. The Project Structure, Parking and Landscaping therefore has been designed to adhere to all of the Redevelopment Design Principles that apply, and in regard to the front yard setback, the project exhibits to the letter the principles as identified in Item 7, "Residential" of these guidelines as enumerated above. item # response to comment: 1 We are encouraged by the positive support we have heard from you, as well as Debbie Fountain, the H&R Director, in regard to the inclusion of a small Bed & Breakfast operation in the project. The applicant has forwarded to you on 23 November 2004 a brief description of the proposed Bed & Breakfast use. Here is a recap: a) The front Unit 6 would be designated as a B & ~operational option, with resident quarters and four bedrooms for tourist occupancy. The main living room and fireplace would be the common gathering space; the den would be a library retreat; the dining area and kitchen would have coffee, juices, fruits, breads & muffins etc. for the guests. 4:00 pm afternoon tea in the lounge, in the courtyard and on the front porch. b) Each room would have its own TV & private bath. c) 2 resident parking spaces are provided in the basement; 4 guest parking spaces are adjacent to the resident parking; the guest parking would be handled by valet after check-in. d) ADA access will be provided by an exterior lift to the courtyard entry area, and into the main floor bedroom & bath. e) Additional staff will tend to the cleaning & maintenance. f) The operator will have this property linked to his website of other rental and visitor property to promote the village location. g) The inclusion of the B&B in this project contributes to the friendly and vibrant character of the Village of Carlsbad, within walking distance to great restaurants, beach, rail station, clubs & shoppes. h) Day trips to San Diego via the Coaster would be available by a short walk to the station; or other trips by car to all the regional attractions (Legoland, Carlsbad Company Stores, Sea World, Zoo, & Carlsbad State Beaches) from the B&B's central location. i) The applicant envisions this facility being on par with facilities in Napa Valley, Santa Barbara & Solvang in the Santa Inez Valley. j) Unit 6 occupies the front SE corner of the project, has its main entry from Roosevelt Street and is separated from the other units with walk gates and windows that look into project landscaping. 2 We recognize that this project at 9 units is just shy of the threshold for inclusion. of passive·or active community recreational features on the site (10 or greater per Table C, Section 21.45.060), as is therefore not required to have these features included. The design of the project does however include within each unit several features of private recreational use that would have been duplicated in a central area: a) Each unit has its own private courtyard with outdoor fireplace, and other balconies that vary per plan. b) Each unit has a jacuzzi tub in the master bathroom, as opposed to a community pool or spa that is a maintenance & liability issue. c) The project site is densely landscaped within the setback yard areas and "walk-streets• that approach the front door of each unit. d) Each unit courtyard provides space for individual BBQ's. e) Each Unit has a basement area that can be used as an additional bedroom or (more appropriately) a home theatre or game room, a feature that is not normally found in townhome projects. f) To enhance the onsite passive recreational aspects, a wall fountain and benches have been added to the walk streets to enhance the approach to the front entries and to sit under the shade of the trees and enjoy the outdoor spaces. g) Within walking distance to the northwest of the project a community park with large grassy play areas offers views to the lagoon. 3 See sheet 7 for the signage details 4 See the landscaped rendered version of the front elevation. 5 See the enhanced elevations on sheets 7 & 8, the fireplace chimneys are of red brick veneer, and a herringbone detail of brick in included in the wider double chimneys on the street facade. 6 As indicated on Sheet 1, lnclusionary Housing Note, the applicant would like to avail himself of the offsite opportunities (housing credit purchase or other home designation), however, Unit 2 is designed as a potential affordable unit. All future items A through G shall be provided to you prior to the hearing. item Carlsbad Village Townhomes RP 04-23 I CT 04-21 Building Department Pat Kelly (760.602.2716) # response: 1 We have spoken to Esgil Corporation, the Building Department Plan Check Company, and as per code, the living areas above the parking garages in the basement will be separated by a one-hour building system. All of the structural elements supporting the floor above must conform. It is proposed that all of the basement solid grouted CMU walls will comply with this regulation; the first floor framing (basement ceiling) is likely to be an 8" precast concrete panel system by Spancrete, which will more than comply with this requirement. The solid core garage doors· also comply. If a wood framed trus-joist system is considered for the floor framing, then one-hour gypsum board I floor assemblies will be provided per the current California Building Code at the time of the project submittal for Building permit. As long as the above criteria are meet, there is no requirement for additional separation to be provided for guest parking spaces that do not have a garage door closure. Open air drives are also allowed. Item # response: Carlsbad Village Townhomes RP 04-23 I CT 04-21 Engineering Department Glen Van Peski (760. 720.0500) 1 See Sheet 9, Tentative Map, topo has been clarified. 2 Existing Utilities have been identified, access hole invert provided. 3 Existing utilities are undersized for project use; new connections provided. Irrigation meter has been added (10 total). 4 SeeSE corner of property, gas easement shown and called out. 5 Property report shows Enright ownership, Grant Deed is provided. 6 See Notes upper left of TM, notes 8 to 13 for service providers. 7 Retaining walls shown with stand.ard symbol. 8 Street grade shown along gutter. 9 Cross-section at adjacent properties shown. 10 SWMP notes added to TM, see SWMP attached. 11 Parking and drive dimensions added. 5' backup area shown. 12 Fire hydrants, new and proposed shown in Roosevelt Street. 13 Demolition note added to existing one-story structures on TM. 14 · Existing trees, mailbox added to TM. ------------------------------------------- Engineering Issues: 1 5 ft offer to dedicate shown on west side of Roosevelt Street, entire width of property frontage. 2 Water meters have been placed behind sidewalk, planter walls offset. 3 Current drainage flows to rear and ponds along southwest fence; neighbor has constructed wall to prevent normal drainage flow. By elevating the west side of the site to 2 ft above the street, gravity surface drainage can be collected and directed to the street, as per normal and customary grading & drainage requirements, avoiding any drainage through adjoining properties. A 4 ft retaining wall along the west PL accomplishes this grade elevation. The wall height will decrease from 4ft high to 2ft high as the wall follows the south and north property lines to the street. The face of the wall is proposed to be beige color split face CMU, with a 4ft to 6ft high wood fence atop the wall for privacy and security. This perimeter wall, in addition to establishing proper drainage, also facilitates the establishment of the lower level in the structure as a basement to be used to conceal the parking and service areas of the project. There appears to be no other feasible alternative to properly drain the site, unless the previous westerly drainage through the adjacent property is reopened by removing the obstructions. 4 The proposed curbing and enhanced landscaping at the entry drive can be supported and accomplished by An Encroachment Removal Agreement, The Homeowners Association will be responsible for maintaining the cross drain and landscaping in the right-of-way. These features also provide for a clear separation between the travel lanes and the parallel parking spaces along the curb, replicate the street character that is found further south on Roosevelt Street, and contribute to the village character of the Redevelopment District. 5 See the garage drive cross-section added to the TM. 6 See attached drainage study; sediment traps will reduce the site out flow. Since the current site conditions are predominantly structure and paving, with little or no absorptive landscaping area, the new project runoff will be reduced substantially from the existing site condition. The new design incorporates a 20% increase in landscaped area that will increase onsite percolation capacity and actually reduce the offsite runoff from 0.16 CFS to 0.09 CFS. However, since the direction of the drainage would be changed to the street, there will be a shallow increase (0.09 CFS) in the offsite runoff that is collected by the street system east of the project site. This may require the partial upgrading of the connecting storm drain located north of the project in Roosevelt Street to accommodate the 1 00 year storm flows: * * * the curb inlet catch basins remain OK, the 8" RCP cross drain may need to be upgraded to 10" RCP, and the northerly 12" RCP drain pipe would remain OK. This pipe connects to an adequately sized 24" RCP as part of Facility AAA, shown in the Drainage Masterplan. The best alternative to this solution is to use an enlarged sediment trap I flow control system onsite that would retard offsite flows by increasing the time of concentration and allow for additional onsite percolation, and therefore reduce the contributary outflow to below a level of significance that would not require any offsite drainage improvements. As stated previously, the only viable option to this solution would be to reassert the rear drainage off the westerly property line by removing the obstructions and allow the drainage to naturally flow though the adjoining property. Drainage through adjoining properties appears to be contrary to standard principles contained in the Map Act, but does however reflect the current condition. item Carlsbad Village Town homes RP 04-231 CT 04-21 Fire Department Greg Ryan ( (760.602.4663) # response: 1 See Fire Department notes, Sheet 1, note 2. 2 See Sheet 1, Site Plan and Sheet 9, Tentative Map; location of new hydrant at project center, south side of entry drive, west side of · Roosevelt Street, in the proposed extended curb planting area. The Fire department Sprinkler riser is shown in the secure area by the dumpsters. 3 See Fire Department notes, Sheet 1, note 6. 4 See Fire Department notes, Sheet 1, note 3, and see also front elevation, Sheet 7 for address numbers. November 23, 2004 DAVID LEE SOANES 6378 PASEO POTRERO CARLSBAD, CA 92009 ----~~--~---~~~----------------- SUBJECT: CARLSBAD VILLAGE TOWNHOMES -2683 & 2687 ROOSEVELT STREET (RP 04-23/CT 04-21) This letter is a follow-up to my previous letter to you, dated November 19, 2004, in which the items necessary to complete your application for a Major Redevelopment Permit were identified. In addition to the items listed in my previous letter, Fire Department's comments on your proposed project are as follows: Fire: The Fire Department has completed its review of the above-referenced project and shall require the following information: 1. This project shall require the installation of an approved automatic fire sprinkler system throughout. If the applicant proposes sale of any or all of the individual units then each shall have to be designed to have its own system. 2. Installation of a fire hydrant within 90 feet of the Fire Department connection inlet will be required. The preferred location of the fire hydrant is on the same side of the proposed project (west side of Roosevelt Street). 3. In the event, that a gate is proposed to be installed to the parking garage, a KNOX Override Key Switch for Fire Department entry will be required. 4. Address numbers shall be a minimum of three (3) inches in height and in contrasting finish (Municipal Code 1804.320) and visible from Roosevelt Street. To discuss all Fire Department related concerns, please contact Deputy Fire Marshal Greg Ryan at (760) 602-4663. Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813 if you have any questions regarding the information contained in this letter. Sincerely, CLIFF ONES Assistant Planner C: Greg Ryan, Fire Department Robert Enright 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 <!) November 19, 2004 DAVID LEE SOANES 6378 PASEO POTRERO CARLSBAD,CA 92009 SUBJECT: CARLSBAD VILLAGE TOWNHOMES -2683 & 2687 ROOSEVELT STREET - (RP 04-23/CT 04-21) Thank you for applying for a Land Use Permit in the City of Carlsbad. The Housing and Redevelopment Department, together with other appropriate City departments has reviewed your Major Redevelopment Permit, application No. RP 04-23/CT 04-21 as to its completeness for processing. The application is incomplete, as submitted. The attached list includes all items necessary to complete the application and/or clarify information on the plans. This list of items must be submitted directly to Housing and Redevelopment Department. All list items must be submitted simultaneously and a copy of this list must be included with your submittals. No processing of your application can occur until the application is determined to be complete. When all required materials are submitted the City has 30 days to make a determination of completeness. If the application is 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, October 21, 2004, to either resubmit the application or submit the required information. Failure to resubmit the application or 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 application 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. CLIFF JO ES Assistant Planner Enclosure c: Pat Kelley, Building Department Glen Van Penski, Engineering 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. 8 • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 (!) LIST OF ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION No. RP04-23 Staff has completed a review of the subject project for application completeness. The following items need to be resolved or adequately addressed prior to formulating a recommendation on the proposed project. Please submit to the Housing and Redevelopment Department six (6) copies of the revised plans showing the following information: (Please note, the issues are listed under the department which identified them as an area of concern.) HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT: 1. Please provide additional information on the proposed Bed & Breakfast use indicated as unit number six (#6). 2. In a large condominium project such as this (9 units) staff suggests that the project provide community recreational space for the future occupants of the project. Examples of community recreational space can be found in the Carlsbad Municipal Code, Section 21.45.060 (attached). 3. Provide a sign detail for any proposed signage. 4. Provide a front elevation of the proposed project that depicts the proposed mature landscaping. 5. As part of the design review process, the Design Review Board must be satisfied that the applicant has made an honest effort to conform to the Village Design Guidelines. The current design and materials of the fireplace and corresponding chimney do not appear to be well integrated into the project. Staff recommends more attention be given to the texture and/or design of the fireplace and corresponding chimney. An example of texture includes stonework. 6. Please be aware that in accordance with the lnclusionary Housing Ordinance for the City of Carlsbad one (1) affordable housing unit will be required to be provided for on site. FUTURE ITEMS REQUIRED PRIOR TO HEARING DATE As soon as all issues are resolved to the satisfaction of all departments the project will be scheduled for a Design Review Board hearing. To help expedite the processing of the permit application the following information is being provided. The following items will be required for the hearing: A. Public Notification Package: (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 Mrs. Jane Smith 123 Magnolia Ave., Apt #3 Carlsbad, CA 92008 UNACCEPTABLE Mrs. Jane Smith 123 Magnolia Ave. Apt. #3 Carlsbad, CA 92008 ACCEPTABLE MRS JANE SMITH APT3 123 MAGNOLIA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 B. One (1) copy of a full-sized (24" x 36") colored site plan. (Needed 2 weeks prior to hearing date.) C. 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.) D. Ten (10) sets of full size plans folded to 8W' x 11". (Needed 2 weeks prior to hearing date.) E. One (1) set of 8W' x 11" black and white reduced plans. (Needed 2 weeks prior to hearing date.) F. Electronic files (in jpeg format) of the colored site plan and all building elevations presented on disk or sent via e-mail to cjones@ci.carlsbad.ca.us (Needed 2 weeks prior to hearing date.) G. Please submit an 8W' x 11 construction material board and color samples showing roofing, exterior walls, trim, etc. For questions regarding Housing & Redevelopment Department comments, please contact Cliff Jones at 760-434-2813. BUILDING: 1. The courtyard/driveway will have to be separated from the living units above by a fire restrictive occupancy separation since it's possible for vehicles to be parked under the living units above. • • 2. Please contact building concerning the courtyards open to the structures above. For questions regarding Building Department comments, please contact Pat Kelley at 760-602- 2716. ENGINEERING: The Engineering Department has completed our review of the above-referenced project for application completeness and has determined that the application and plans submitted for this project are incomplete and unsuitable for a complete review. Staff has identified some issues that are listed below. Additional issues of concern may be identified on subsequent reviews with more complete information. INCOMPLETE ITEMS 1. Clearly label existing topographic details to permit analysis. Contours are unreadable, and non-standard abbreviations are used. 2. Call out existing utilities, with the kind of utility, the size and material of pipe, and in the case of the sewer, an invert elevation at the access hole. 3. Show existing water services and sewer laterals. Existing water services should be utilized unless they conflict with proposed improvements. Show proposed irrigation service and meter. 4. Plot existing easements. Note 06 on map says "no easements", but the title report shows an easement. 5. Provide updated title report, or grant deed to show that the Enrights are the current owners, or show the current owner on the map if it is not the Enrights. 6. List the Districts providing service to the project as redlined on the tentative map print. 7. Show-proposed retaining walls by using the standard symbol. 8. Show the existing street grade of Roosevelt Street (i.e. percentage slope, and in which direction). 9. Show cross-sections to depict how the project relates to surrounding properties. 10. Provide a preliminary Storm Water Managemer.t Plan (SWMP). Project is not defined as a "priority project"' requiring enhanced permanent Best Management Practice (BMP) requirements, but it does need to meet the standard permanent BMP requirements. ·Refer to the City Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP). 11. Show all parking and drive aisle widths. Provide a 5-foot backup area past the last stalls. 12. Show all existing fire hydrants within 300 feet of the project. 13. Show the existing structures onsite, or add a note that all existing structures will be removed. 14. Show the existing trees, mailboxes, etc. along the property frontage on Roosevelt. ISSUES 1. Provide a 5-foot dedication on Roosevelt Street to complete the 60-foot right of way. This will revise the front setback shown. • 2. Show water meters as behind the sidewalk. Any proposed walls will have to be offset to allow room for the meters. 3. Provide justification for raising the site. Plans show a wall/fence combination that in some cases exceeds 1 0 feet total height. 4. Remove the proposed curbing within the public right-of-way. Show a standard driveway or alley-type driveway. 5. Provide a cross-section showing the driveway into the basement, with grades, lengths of vertical curves, etc. 6. Prepare a preliminary drainage report, to show that either no increase in runoff will be created, or the existing drainage system to the north can handle the proposed increase. Submit three copies, signed and sealed. Address the issue of diversion of drainage, since the site previously drained to the west, and is proposed to now drain to the east. Please be advised, additional items of concern may be identified after requested information has been provided. For questions regarding Engineering Department comments please contact Glen Van Peski at 760-720-0500, or email him at gvanp@ci.carlsbad.ca.us. Fire Department plancheck comments will be sent to you under a separate correspondence. MEMORANDUM November 17, 2004 TO: Cliff Jones FROM: JESSICA GALLOWAY RE: PRE04-14 Carlsbad Village Town homes (RP04-23 I CT 04-21) Please find below Planning's comments on the Preliminary Review application. 1. Garage level bedroom or bonus room could easily be converted into a second unit on all of the units, due to the separate street side entrance. 2. The bed and breakfast option (Unit 6) is considered a provisional use in District 8. Provisional use replaces the term conditional uses, which is used in the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Provisional uses are subject to the discretionary approval of either the Housing and Redevelopment Director or the appropriate decision making authority. 3. Planning staff does not see a bed and breakfast as an appropriate use in a multi-family setting. Arrivals and departure early in the morning is a potential disturbance for onsite neighbors and the surrounding neighborhood. 4. Parking for a bed and breakfast would have to be provided on site. 5. Provide the dimension of all wall heights. --i> 6. 7. ~ 8. The garage interiors shall be 20'x20' (one-car garages) and 12'x20' (one-car garage) clear of any obstacles. This shall be measured from interior wall to interior wall, not the midpoint of the wall. The hot water heater and any other mechanical equipment is not allowed in this 20'x20' area. The project is subject to providing at least two affordable housing units. Provide calculations to prove the basement actually meets the basement definition. • 9. Staff is concerned with size of units. The majority of the units have more than 3 bedrooms and multiple baths which could potentially lead to parking issues for the overall site. A potential problem would be if a unit were to be rented out to several people. Jessica Galloway JG • CITY OF CARLSBAD • ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT LAND USE REVIEW November 15, 2004 TO: CLIFF JONES, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT FROM: Glen Van Peski, Consultant Project Engineer VIA: JOHN MAASHOFF, ACTING SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER RE: ISSUES REVIEW CARLSBAD VILLAGE TOWNHOMES CT 04-23/RP 04-21 The Engineering Department has completed our review of the above-referenced project for application completeness and has determined that the application and plans submitted for this project are incomplete and unsuitable for a complete review. Staff has identified some issues that are listed below. Additional issues of concern may be identified on subsequent reviews with more complete information. INCOMPLETE ITEMS 1. Clearly label existing topographic details to permit analysis. Contours are unreadable, and non-standard abbreviations are used. 2. Call out existing utilities, with the kind of utility, the size and material of pipe, and in the case of the sewer, an invert elevation at the access hole. 3. Show existing water services and sewer laterals. Existing water services should be utilized unless they conflict with proposed improvements. Show proposed irrigation service and meter. 4. Plot existing easements. Note 06 on map says "no easements", but the title report shows an easement. 5. Provide updated title report, or grant deed to show that the Enrights are the current owners, or show the current owner on the map if it is not the Enrights. 6. List the Districts providing service to the project as redlined on the tentative map print. 7. Show proposed retaining walls by using the standard symbol. 8. Show the existing street grade of Roosevelt Street (i.e. percentage slope, and in which direction). 9. Show cross-sections to depict how the project relates to surrounding properties. 10. Provide a preliminary Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP). Project is not defined as a "priority project" requiring enhanced permanent Best Management Practice (BMP) requirements, but it does need to meet the standard permanent BMP requirements. Refer to the City Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP). 11. Show all parking and drive aisle widths. Provide a 5-foot backup area past the last stalls. 12. Show all existing fire .rants within 300 feet of the project. • 13. Show the existing structures onsite, or add a note that all existing structures will be removed. 14. Show the existing trees, mailboxes, etc. along the property frontage on Roosevelt. ISSUES ~ 1. Provide a 5-foot dedication on Roosevelt Street to complete the 60-foot right of way. ~ 2. This will revise the front setback shown. Show water meters as behind the sidewalk. Any proposed walls will have to be offset to allow room for the meters. 3. Provide justification for raising the site. Plans show a wall/fence combination that in some cases exceeds 10 feet total height. 4. Remove the proposed curbing within the public right-of-way. Show a standard driveway or alley-type driveway. 5. Provide a cross-section showing the driveway into the basement, with grades, lengths of vertical curves, etc. 6. Prepare a preliminary drainage report, to show that either no increase in runoff will be created, or the existing drainage system to the north can handle the proposed increase. Submit three copies, signed and sealed. Address the issue of diversion of drainage, since the site previously drained to the west, and is proposed to now drain to the east. Please be advised, additional items of concern may be identified after requested information has been provided. A red-lined check print is enclosed for the applicants use in making the requested revisions. This check print should be returned with the next submittal to facilitate continued staff review. If you or the applicant have any questions, please either see or call me at 760-720-0500, or email me at gvanp@ci.carlsbad.ca.us. Glen K. Van Peski, P.E. Consultant Project Engineer -Development Services enc.