HomeMy WebLinkAboutRP 98-08; Carlsbad Village Resort; Redevelopment Permits (RP)July 22, 1998
City of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
Howard Gad
Heritage West
4370 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 655
SanDiego, CA92122-1253
Subject: Carlsbad Village Resort (RP 98-08/CDP 98-48)
Dear Mr. Gad:
Thank you for submitting an application for a Redevelopment Permit for your hotel
project located on Carlsbad Boulevard, between Beech Avenue and Christiansen Way.
Your redevelopment permit application was received for processing on June 23, 1998 and
has been deemed incomplete for further processing as of the date of this correspondence.
The items listed below fall into two categories. The first items contain information which
must be submitted to complete your application. No processing of your application can
occur until the application is determined to be complete. The second list of items are
issues of concem as identified by staff. When all required information and materials are
submitted, the City has 30 days to make a determination of completeness. If the
application is deemed complete, processing for a decision on the application will be
initiated:
ITEMS NEEDED FOR COMPLETENESS
1. A lighting plan which shows how exterior light will impact adjacent residences.
ISSUES OF CONCERN
Engineering Department:
1.
2.
The buildings are located across existing lot lines. The applicant must process
and receive approval of a lot line adjustment. The lot line adjustment will be
included as a condition of approval of the Coastal Development Permit and must
be recorded prior to issuance of a building permit.
The existing SDG&E easements must be quitclaimed prior to issuance of a
building permit.
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (619) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (619) 720-2037
3. The project will be required to underground all overhead utilities adjacent to the
site.
4. The City is in the process of obtaining permits for our Opportunistic Sand
Program. Based on the preliminary soils report, the anticipated export material
may meet the criteria established for a candidate source of beach nourishment.
The applicant should coordinate with staff for the program.
5. The applicant will be required to comply with the provisions of the Clean Water
Act for non-point storm water discharges. The applicant is advised to address the
water discharges from the underground parking structure and how this discharge
will be treated prior to entering the public storm drain system.
6. The project must maintain adequate sight distance corridors at all driveway
locations and the sight line must be shown on the site plan. The sight distance
evaluation should take into consideration a design speed of 35mph.
7. The trash enclosure is located in the underground parking structure. This location
may preclude trash pick up services. The applicant should contact Coast Waste
Management and coordinate the location of the enclosure site.
8. The project must make a separate application for all proposed street right-of-way
vacations.
9. The site plan identifies various ingress, egress, right-of-way and utility easements.
However, the plan does not specify the disposition of these easements. Please
address.
10. Various parking space dimensions and configurations are in conflict with current
design standards. Please see comments on the site plans (to be sent under separate
cover). Also, the plan shows parking spaces in the entrance aisle from Carlsbad
Boulevard. Are these spaces part of the required parking? Are they considered
long term parking which would obstruct circulation through the porte-cochere?
11. The red-line check print must be retumed with the next submittal in order to
expedite the review process.
Housing and Redevelopment Department:
Site Plans:
1. The Provisional Use Standards contained in the Master Plan state that the location
of loading/service areas should not impact adjacent residential properties. While
the area has been modified from the preliminary submittal, the impacts to
surrounding residents have not been adequately address. Thus, staff continues to
recommend that the loading/service be relocated.
2. The Provisional Use Standards state that the scale and character of the hotel must
be appropriate to its location. The Master Plan Design Guidelines (Page 4-3) state
that new uses must minimize privacy loss for adjacent residential uses. The
elimination of the first floor patios along the north elevation is a good first step.
However, staff recommends that the plans be revised so that no portion of the
building encroach into the proposed 10 foot setback.
3. All adjacent stmctures within 100 feet of the property line are required to be
shovm. Please show all stmctures along the east property line have been shown.
4. The plan does a good job of providing benches along public pedestrian frontages.
In addition, the plan should include off-street courtyards accessible fi'om major
pedestrian walkways. The landscape area south of the front entrance should
provide adequate opportunity for this design element.
5. The parking lot should include such enhancements as colored concrete, brick
work, and/or stamped concrete. Please indicate the design and location of such
features on the site plan.
6. The preliminary submittal did not include a floor plan. It was after the April 10,
1998 preliminary review letter that staff leamed that the project would include
conference rooms. The inclusion of the conference rooms vAW require additional
parking at the rate of 1 space per every 100 feet of assembly area. This will result
in the need for approximately 20 additional spaces.
Elevations:
1. In the April IO'*' letter, staff recommended that closer attention be paid to the 10
basic design principals contained in the Master Plan. It remains staffs
recommendation that further architectural detail be provided. This should include
facade projections and recesses such as bay windows, planter boxes, roof
overhangs and window trim. Additional detail should also be added to the design
of the roof and balconies.
2. The elevations should call-out all of the various design elements. This will
include the color of the guard rail, color and material of the screen walls, where
the field and accent color shown on the material board shall be used, color and
material of the trellis, what the cross-hatching on the second and third floor
represent.
3. The project does a good job of using neutral base colors as called for in the master
plan. The Master Plan (and staff) also recommend the inclusion of dark or
brighter trim colors.
4. The Design Guidelines state that buildings should be designed with visual interest
on all sides of the building (Page 4-11). The "ends" of the building along the
north, east and west elevations need additional detail.
5. The elevations submitted are at drawn at such a small a scale it is difficult to
provide adequate review. Please provide larger scale elevation drawings (1/4" =
1') with your next submittal.
Landscaping
ij<y^
1. Additional tree planting should be added to the ^ast elevation.
2. Vines should be added to the fences adjacent to the property lines.
It is staff responsibility to review all proposals against the standards and regulations
contained in the Carlsbad Village Master Plan & Design Manual. In the April 10* letter,
staff provided comments and recommended several changes necessary for the project to
be found consistent with the Master Plan. Based upon the current submittal, the proposal
remains largely unchanged and many of staffs comments have not been addressed. If
you wish to continue the processing of the application, and seek a recommendation of
approval by staff to the decision making bodies, the above listed changes must be
incorporated into the project design.
If you have any questions about the above information, please call me at (760) 434-2817.
Sincerely,
Craig D. Ruiz
Management Analyst
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
April 10, 1998
Howard Gad
Heritage West
4370 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 655
SanDiego, CA 92122-1253
Subject: Preliminary Review for the Carlsbad Boulevard Hotel
Dear Mr. Gad:
The City of Carlsbad Housing and Redevelopment Department and the Engineering
Department have reviewed the preliminary plans for the above referenced project.
Overall, there are many elements to the proposed plan that do a good job of incorporating
the elements contained in the Carlsbad Village Master Plan & Design Manual ("Master
Plan"). However, staff has concems with the proposal as it relates to neighborhood
compatibility, site design, architecture and building height.
Below, please find staffs comments on the preliminary plans:
Engineering Department:
1. Please see attached memorandum.
Housing and Redevelopment Department:
General Comments:
1. It appears that in an attempt to keep the site plan and elevations on one page, it
was necessary to draw the plans at a very small scale. When a formal application
is submitted, please submit plans drawn to a larger scale that will be sufficient to
provide necessary details for adequate review.
2. Because of the small scale of the plans, many of staffs comments are in the form
of questions or requests for clarification. Thus, staff anticipates that there will be
further comments on said plans when they are submitted at a later date.
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (619) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (619) 720-2037
Site Plans:
It appears that project is proposing a sole service area located along Beech
Avenue. The Provisional Use Standards contained in the Master Plan (Page 2-46),
state that the location of loading/service areas should not impact adjacent
residential properties. Thus, the loading/service area is not appropriate at this
location and should be relocated. v. - '. 'L^
The Provisional Use Standards state that the scale and character of the hotel must
be appropriate to its location. The Master Plan Design Guidelines (Page 4-3) state
that new uses must minimize privacy loss for adjacent residential uses. Thus,
staff believes that the proposed set backs from residential stmctures aloiig Beech
Avenue are not appropriate and should be increased. \J'^ C ^' ^" '
3. All adjacent stmctures within 100 feet of the property line are required to be
shown. It does not appear that all stmctures along the east property line have been
shown.
-7
4. What type of screening does the project propose along the east and north property
lines? Staff suggests that a combination of block walls and landscaping be
provided,
5. It appears that the first floor patios along Carlsbad Boulevard are accessible from
^ the street. Will there be any type of fencing or other separation device to provide
some security or privacy?
Elevations:
1. The Development Standards (Page 3-7) allow buildings to be a maximum of 45
feet. It appears that the building exceeds this requirement by approximately 5
feet. Cross sections of each elevation indicating the existing and proposed grade,
along with the delineation of the parking stmcture will be necessary to determine
the exact height of the stmcture. Also, building height is measured to the peak of
a stmcture and not to the mid-point of the roof as indicated on the plans. For your
assistance, I have included a copy of the building height definition for your
review.
2. The Development Standards state that a building can be a maximum of 45 feet in
y height with a roof pitch of 7:12, or greater. The proposed roof pitch of 6:12 will
need to be modified.
3. The Design Guidelines include 10 basic design principals (Page 4-1). While all
10 are important to the proposed project, the following principals need further
emphasis: Architectural design shall emphasize variety and diversity; A strong
emphasis shall be placed on ground floor facades; and, Buildings shall be
enriched with architectural features and details. See attached comments on design
guideline checklist for additional areas of review.
4. While the project does a good job in providing staggered set backs to break-up the
facade of the building, additional design details should be included to reduce the
repetitive style of the building. Further, the use of dormers should be increased,
their size should vary and their scale should be appropriate to the design of the
building. Incorporating these details into the design will make the project more
consistent with Design Principals contained in the Master Plan (Page 4-1).
5. The Design Guidelines state that buildings should be designed with visual interest
on all sides of the building (Page 4-11). The "ends" of the building along the
north, east and west elevations need additional detail.
6. As stated above, staff is concemed with the relationship of the hotel to the
adjacent residential stmctures. The Design Guidelines (Page 4-7) recommends
that taller buildings be stepped back at upper levels.
7. Provide the location and details of the proposed signs.
The above comments are based upon the preliminary plans for the project. Staff
anticipates that additional comments will be provided when the formal application is
submitted and reviewed for compliance with the development standards and design
guidelines as set forth in the Carlsbad Village Master Plan & Design Manual.
If you have any questions about the above information, please call me at (760) 434-2817.
Sincerely,
Craig D. Ruiz
Management Analyst
cc: Steve Jantz
Fib-17-98 OS:33P P.Ol
HERITAGE WEST
Febmary 17. 1998
Via: Fax 521-9672
Mr. Bill Ponder
California Coastal Commission
311 Camino Del Rio South, Ste 200
San Diego, Calif 92108
RE: Carlsbad Hotel Property
Dear Mr. Ponder:
As we discuss today, my company has in escrow a 1.49 acre piece of
property located on the northeast corner of Carlsbad Boulevard and
Christianson Way in Carlsbad (see enclosed map) This property currentiy
falls within the jurisdiction ofthe Carlsbad local coastal plan; however, the
issue at hand involves a 1981 CC&R agreement between a previous owner
and the State Coastal Commission which we would Wke to modified (see
enclosed).
We plan to develop a hotel on the property and have been working with
the Carlsbad Redevelopment Agency to that end. The hotel would have a
partially subterranean parking garage and three floors of rooms around a
central pool.
Last week during a review of title information, we found that CC&R,s
had been recorded on the property back in 1981 restricting uses on the first
floor ofthe property. A previous property owner who planned to develop an
office complex on the property presumably put this use restriction in place in
order to obtain approvals. I assume the Coastal Commission required the
restrictions because offices would not accommodate tourist-oriented uses on
the property. I contacted Craig Ruiz of the Redevelopment Agency as soon as
I learned of this problem. He suggested I contact you even though the local
Carlsbad agency now has jurisdiction. Craig wanted me to contact you to
make sure there would not be a problem and to discuss how a modification
might be handled
Although first floor usage by a hotel project is not excluded in the deed
restrictions, it is unclear as to what other uses might be permissible. Obviously
a hotel is tourist - oriented and falls within the spirit of the Coastal Act in terms
of public usage along the coast. The Carlsbad Redevelopment Agency has
been supportive of the project and would like to see a hotel at that site.
\\HWDC\SYS\GENeRAL\Car1Hote«\CORRESVCoasta( Comm. CCRs doc
Page 1 of 2
437U LA j<j) I-x V 1 1 \<.i l.'n.-.'i . S. ri 11. 6.'5.S lr( (6 I')) 4':>«-1 I 4 I www h(;TUH}:<r'w;-';( n)rn
SAN Dif.r.o, CALM'ic.Ni N :-M ;> ;^ - I KA < (619)458 0041 i'-r^Ui^ 'u-*i.'thf:nrnf<ewe.-.r com
Feb-17-98 06:33P P.02
I would propose that an amendment to the CC&Rs be drafted
which clarifies that a hotel and limited service hotel restaurant be permitted on
the first floor of this new, tourist oriented development. I would further suggest
that the local Carlsbad jurisdiction, as the successor to the State Coastal
Commission in this area, be the lead agency for approving and executing the
CC&R modification.
It is extremely important that this issue be dealt with quickly. We are
spending significant sums on plans and consultants and would hope to have a
decision on the concept proposed by the end of this week. I would greatly
appreciate your efforts to help expedite this matter so we can proceed. Please
call if you have any questions or need additional information.
Truly yours,
HERITAGE WEST DEVELOPMENT CO
a Caljfornia corporation,
Howard Gad
President
HG/
Enciosj4^Sr€€ffiKs
Cc: Cr.raiflR.ihr^ Carisbad Redevelopment Agency Via FAX 760 720-2037
Josh Nordan, Via FAX (619) 233-3254
v\nWDC\SYS\GENERAL\Caf1Hotel\CORRES\Coafilal Comm CCRs.doc
Page 2 of 2
Site Location: NE ofCarlsbad Blvd. at Christianson Way
1.49 Acres Zoned Tourist / Commercial
North Co. Vicinity Map Carlsbad Village Map
Access
Centi <il
Cort!
Tl
ID
I
H
Sj
I \D 00
0
ov
w
V
Feb-
-J
i
06:33P
: tKECOnOtHQ RSQv ^TBO BY httO KAIL TO
_ flan Pi»Qo CoMt wqionil <:oBi»ii<lon
StWSBT 6l54_.Hl»«ion Gony Road. Suite 220
CtTY San Dlego, Ch 92170
ShU OIEGO COKST REglQWAL CO'VIISSION
P . 04
AGRBEKEtrr I.tPOSXNC R&StRICTIONS ON
REAL PROPrm
This «cw««*nt is OAde thif 20th day of ^»ove^lbe^, 1980 by See atCa<:h<>d
Exhibit "A", h«r«in«rt«r referred to a* -Permittee,- snd the $«n Dieqo Co^et
Reqionfll CoiMnieiioni
VrtfERDAS, Permittee ie the owner
of the following described real property in the County of £an Dieqo,
see Attached Exhibit "B"
mEttEAS, pureuant to the California Coaetai Aet of W70 (Public neeourcee
Code 30O00 et seq.) Pemtttee h^a sought in Application No. P9354 a pomiit for
the following described dewlopmentT
Conatniction of arproximately 19,200 aq.ft. cowterclal-office complex.
wifERCAS, the San Diego Coast Reqionai Cormission haa Oetetnined to isaati
a permit for t.^is developnent subject to conditions which ar« lrmo««,« 'or Khf
beneUt ol the public and aurtoundlna landowners, and without agreenrnt to
which by Permittee no permit could be iaauad>
NO* THER£roRE, in consideration of the issuance of the tJeveiopment rx-rmit
and Of the benefit conferred thereby on the subject property, Pomittee hereby
covrnance and anreee with tho San Dieao coa-t Regional COffritaion to the
followinq restriction upon the possession, uso, «nd anjoynent of t)\<i subject
OD
OO CM
01
Feb-17-98 OS : 34^P
Aqreenent laposim ReBtrietioite
on Real Property
Pa9« 2
Project r9354
property, which restricticHi shall be attached to and become a part of the
deed to the propertyi
The uflea on tha first floor of the project shall bn limited to coimercisl
'jses including retail convenience sal^^t touriflt-orlented specialty shopa,
personal services, raereation, antartainnent, and sports equipnient rental.
In no case, ahsll general office, restaurant, or bar uss be allowed on tha
first floor without the prior consent of the San Diego Coast Regionsl
Ccrf.u3iilo;» or Its successor in interest.
Pennittee acknowledges that any violati.(>n of this deed restriction will
constitute a violation of the California Coastal Act of l97u and of Pcmit
No. F9.154, and will subject Pennittee or any other person violating the
deed restriction to suit as provided by ths Coastal Act.
XT IS FURTHER RECOGNIZED that this aqreSMnt and deed restriction is
a covenant running with the land and shall bind Psmittse, and all successors
and asaiqna of Pemlttes. Xf any portion of tha subject property should
hereafter be conveyed, the conveyance shall contain the restriction created
by this agreevent.
Rxccu'ilvc director
$An Dii*«70 Coast Regional Coranissian
00 oo t
Feb-17-'98 OQ : 34P
'•^^^i\
yreeaent lapostng Restrtcttoha
'on Real Property
Page 3
PHOJECT r "53 S4
STATE OF CAtXFORMlA
CXXINTT OP
)
On
Public, porsonally appearad
/ / before M, the undersigned Notary
Jeffrey Blanhenship
Susan Blankenshli and Thonaa Alexander
known to na to ba tha parsons whose nane* are subscribed to the foregoing instxu-
Mnt and acknowledged to sis that thay axueutad tha eassi,
witnssB ny hand and official sssl tha day and year in tha certifieata first
Above written.
OFllCIAI sr-.M
SAWOltGO COUNIY
TO BE PILLED IH BY COHHISSIOtI
Itotkry pubUo^ ifi and for/^ha
Oonnty o:
8tae« of Califomia
Ihis is to certify that tha deed reatrletion set forth above, dated tioveinbcr 2P
Jeffrey Blsnkenship
19 Pp_» and aignad by Susnn Plnnkpnshtp and Thomaa Alexander
Psrwittes, is hereby accepted by order of ^Jie San Diego Ccast Regional Comsission on
Movctifcer 7, HflO and seid Conissioo consents to recordation thereof by
its BNeeutive Director, its duly authorised officer.
Dete
Csacutive Director
San Dlego Coest Regional Conmission
OO CM
5«
%
\
\
Feb-17-'98 065 : 34P
1
on this
undersigned NotAry Pubiie, personally appeared Tom CranJail
Known tc ne to be the Ewcuttve Director of the San Diego Coast Regional Cosraissicn
end known to ee to be tha person who executed the foregoing instrunent on behalf of
said Comission, and acknowledged to M that such Ccannisaion exacutad tha sam.
HibMias siy hand and official seal tha day and yaar in the oertifioate first
Notary Public in and foz tha
San Disgo County of
Btata of California
^ i
CO
oo
CM
Feb - 17 -'98 OQ : 34P P . 08
i .M '
y •
EXHIBIT "A"
Jeffrey Blankenship
Susan Dlankenship
Thomaa Alexander
00
00 CM
U
Feb - 1 7 -'98 , 0<5 : 34P P . 09
11
4 ,
WW
That rti^l property located in the City of Carlsbad, County of
San oiego, fully described in Grant Deeds recorded in the
Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County as Pile/Page
N08, 79-340381, SO-163747, and 80-187294.
go
CO
00 CM
i
V
January 27,1999
TO: Carlsbad Blvd. Hotel File (RP98-08, CDP98-48)
FROM: Management Analyst, Housing and Redevelopment Department
SUBJECT JANUARY 27,1999 MEETING WITH JIM ANDERSON
In a meeting today, Jim Anderson informed me that the current applicant, Howard Gad,
will no longer be processing the hotel project application. In light of this, I requested
and Mr. Anderson agreed that he will have a representative of the partnership that
owns the hotel site to write a letter requesting that the City suspend processing their
application for 90 days. This will allow them to determine if they will process the
application or bring in a new hotel developer.
One issue for Mr. Anderson's clients is that the previous applicant had an option to
purchase the property to the east (352 Christiansen) which is the location of a portion
the project's above grade parking. However, the partnership did not get an assigrmient
of the option. The partnership is currently attempting to negotiate with the adjacent
property owner a similar purchase option for themselves.
CRAIG RUIZ
MEMORANDUM
September 11, 1998
TO: Management Analyst Craig Ruiz
FROM: Associate Engineer Steven Jantz
VIA: Principal Engineer Land Use Review - Bob Wojcik
RP 98-08/CDP 98-48
CONDITIONS TRANSMITTAL
The Engineering Department has completed its review of the subject project and is recommending that the project
be approved subject to the following conditions:
38. Prior to issuance of any building permit, the developer shall comply with the requirements of the City's
anti-graffiti program for wall treatments if and when such a program is formerly established by the City.
46. Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from any proposed constmction site within this
project, the developer shall submit to and receive approval from the City Engineer for the proposed haul
route. The developer shall comply with all conditions and requirements the City Engineer may impose
with regards to the hauling operation.
47. Rain gutters must be provided to convey roof drainage to an approved drainage course or street to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
50. The developer shall pay all current fees and deposits required.
66. Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall underground all existing overhead utilities along
the project boundary.
70. The developer shall comply with the City's requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit. The developer shall provide 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 approved by
the City Engineer. Said plans shall include but not be limited to notifying prospective owners and tenants
of the followmg:
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.
71. Prior to the issuance of building permits, plans, specifications, and supporting documents for all public
improvements shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. In accordance with City
Standards, the developer shall install, or agree to install and secure with appropriate security as provided
by law, improvements shown on the site plan and the following improvements:
• Proposed street widening of Christiansen Way
• Proposed street widening of Beech Avenue
72. The developer shall install street lights along all public and private street frontages in conformance
with City of Carlsbad Standards.
73. The developer shall install sidewalks along all public streets abutting the project in conformance with City
of Carlsbad Standards prior to occupancy of any buildings.
74. Prior to occupancy of any buildings, the developer shall install wheelchair ramps at the public street
comers abutting the project site in conformance with City of Carlsbad Standards.
75. The stmctural section for the access aisles must be designed with a traffic index of 5.0 in accordance
with City Standards due to tmck access through the parking area and/or aisles with an ADT greater than
500. The stmctural pavement design of the aisle ways shall be submitted together with required R-value
soil test information and approved by the City as part of the building site plan review.
Code Reminder:
35. The 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 the Carlsbad Municipal Code
and the City Engineer.
Special Conditions:
1. The developer shall install and maintain sight distance corridors at all driveway intersections with the
public streets in accordance with Engineering Standards.
2. The driveway approach to the ramp located on Beech Avenue shall be constructed to a minimum 30
foot width
3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the developer shall process and record a street vacation of a
portion of Christiansen Way to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
4. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the developer must process and receive approval of a lot line
adjustment to consolidate the existing lots into one lot to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
5. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the developer must show proof of recordation of the
quitclaim of the existing SDG&E easements.
If you have questions regarding any of the comments above, please contact me at extension 4354.
STEVEN C. JANTZ
Associate Engineer - Land Use Review
Craig Ruiz - Carlstfad Vill^e Resoil Page 1
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
Craig:
Mike Smith
Craig Ruiz
9/11/98 12:04PM
Carlsbad Village Resort
The only Fire Protection issue at this point is with emergency ingress and egress along the North side of
the building. Please include the following project condition in the report. Thanks
Upgrade the proposed gravel exit path serving the North end ofthe building to hardscape, and extend
the path along the perimeter of the property to Beech Street.
Septembers, 1998
TO: CRAIG RUIZ, MANAGEMENT ANALYST
FROM: Senior Planner Neu
RP 98-0/CDP 98-48 - CARLSBAD RESORT HOTEL REVISED PLANS
I have completed reviewing the revised plans for the above referenced project. I have no
additional comments relative to my responsibility to prepare the environmental documents for
the project. Please let me know when you deem the application complete and determine that the
design complies with all the requirements of the Redevelopment Master Plan. At that time I will
begin preparing the necessary environmental documents.
You can reach me at extension 4446.
Don Neu