Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
RP 99-14; Army & Navy Academy Dormitory; Redevelopment Permits (RP) (2)
City of Carlsbad 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Applicant: ARMY&NAVY ACADEMY DescriDtion RP990014 Ainount 3,330.00 Receipt Number: R0006765 Transaction Date: 09/29/1999 Pay Type Method Description Amount Payment Payment Payment Check Check Check 3011 3010 3012 1,030.00 1,800.00 500.00 Transaction Amount: 3,330.00 Transmittal Date: To: Attn: Proj: 05/07/01 City of Carlsbad -Housing and Redevelopment Department 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B Carlsbad, Ca 92008 Lori Rosenstein New Dormitory Building & Parking Lot Architiecture Planning Interiors Management Proj No.: DSA No.: From: cc: Signature: 99033.00 Mike Kohls, tBP/Architecture File 6.6 Transmitting I 11 Change Orders • I Prints •I I Construction Docs I I I Specifications • I Copy of Letter • | Submittal I 11 Under Separate Cover I I I Shop Drawings I 11 Samples I 11 Preliminary Drawings I 11 Diskettes •1 Other Qty Description 12 sets Planning Dept. Submittal sets (30 x 42) 12 sets Color reduced elevations 2 sets 11x17 planning dept. submittal 1 set (2 boards) 30 x 42 color elevations 1 color board IViessage Lori, If you need any additional information please call. Thanks, Mike I I For Your Use i I Approved as Corrected I I Approved I—I Correct & Return Bl For Approval I—I 1^ Please Return • • U.P.S. U.P.S. Ovemight U.P.S. 2 FedEx nd Day CZ] • • • O.C.B. Delivery tBP Delivery U.S. Mail iBP Architeciuie 2300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach. CA. 92663 ph: 949 673 0300 tax: 949 673 9267 ii T5J .a 5 V i-i P3 < S >- =d < Q c3 I //^ grar^ Cx COLOR & MATERIALS BOARD ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY CARLSBAD tBP/Architecture CALIFORNIA 2300 Newport Boulevard • Newport Beach. CA 949/673-0300 • http. //www. tbparch.com 9 2 6 6 3 SITE BEECH VILLAGE REDEVELOPMENT AREA AVE 4 City of Carlsbad ARMY NAVY ACADEMY MASTER SITE PLAN RP 94-02/CDP 94-02/ CUP 94-02 i Transmittal Attn: Proj: Proj No.: Date: 09/29/99 To: The City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, Califomia 92008 Planning Department Master Plan and Development Submittal Army and Navy Academy 99014.00 From: Robert Morales, tBP/Architecture cc: Steven Miller, President, Army and Navy Academy Signature: I 11 Copy of Letter l~l| Submittal I 11 Under Separate Cover I I I Shop Drawings Architecture Planning Interiors Mani^ement Transmitting I 11 Change Orders Prints I 11 Construction Docs I I I Specifications Ol Samples • I Preliminary Drawings I 11 Diskettes •I Other Qty Description 10 Folded prints of Site and Building Drawings 1 Noise Study by RKJK & Associates dated September 7,1999 Preliminary Geotechnical Study by Kleinfelder, Inc. dated September 17,1999 Title Report by First American Title Insurance Company dated August 11,1999 Redevelopment Permit Application, Land Use Review Application, Disclosure Statement, Coastal Development permit Supplemental Application, Environmental Impact Assessment Form, Project Description/Explanation, Location Map, Amendment to Architectural Design Guidelines and Reduced copies of Site and Building Exterior Elevations. 1 Checks for filing fees in the amounts of $400, $1,03^0, $500 and $1,800. 1^ Message The attached information is submitted for planning review per our previous conversations with Lori Rosenstein and per the City's Preliminary Review dated May 19,1999. Please call Mike Sullivan of the ANA at 729-2385 (ext.2260) or myself with any comments or questions. • • • • For Your Use Approved as Corrected Approved Correct & Return For Approval Please Return • • • • U.P.S. U.P.S. Overnight U.P.S. 2 Fed Ex nd Day • • O.C.B. Delivery tBP Delivery U.S. Mail tBP/Architecture 2300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA, 92663 ph: 949 673 0300 fax: 949 673 9267 07/20/99 12:04 ©714 673 9267 T.B.P. I21001/002 FAX Memorandum Date: 07/20/99 To; City of Carlsbad, Housing and Redevelopment 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B Archittcture Carlsbad, CA 92008 ^^ng Intenois Attn: Lori Rosenstein, Management Analyst ManagcTOcnt FAX: 760/720-2037 Proj: Army and Navy Academy Site and Street Improvements Proj No.; 99014.00 From: Robert Morales, tBP/Architecture cc: Stephan Miller, ANA Anthony DePaola, tBP Message/Memo: The following information is for your response as applicable: Public FaciUties Fee/Form Requirements: According to the filing requirements, nonprofit organizations are excluded from paying and filing this form. I have attached the Academy's "Statement by Domestic Nonprofit Corporation" for yotir review. Based on this information, we will not be filing this form unless otherwise directed by the City of Carlsbad. Design Guidelines: As discussed, we will proceed wilh drafting amendments to the approved Design Guidelines for the proposed buildings, rather than providing a new set of Design Guidelines. tBP/Architecture 2300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA. 92663 ph: 949 673 0300 fax: 949 673 9267 07/20/99 12:04 7-19-1999 5:22AM 673 9267 ARMY AND NAVY T.B.P, ACADE 619 43d 121002/002 P.3 Stale of California Bill Jones Secretary of state S-mlwiENT BY DOMESTIC NONPROFIT CORPORATION THIS STATEWEMT MUST BE FILEO WITH CALIFOfWU SECRETARY QF STATE tSECTiONS 6210. B210. S660 CORPORATIONS COPE) f> O. QQ* 944230 Saerrarnonto, CA 94244-^00 Pnorw; (916) 6S?-363^ THE $10 FILING FEE MUST ACCOMPANY THIS STATEMENT- C0189S6B PB DUE DATE 12-31-SB ARMY ANO NAVY ACADEMY. CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA p 0 BOX 3000 CARLSBAD, CA 92016-3000 08437N DO NOT WRnS IN THIS SPACE 4. CHIEF BXBCUTIVE emCCP STRtCT APPHeS* (see REVKRSB 9IBE) am. CITY AMO STATE 4e. ZIP CODE 3. BCCRCTARV Al^r. 0'ki>:.^ SA. «TREET ADOne^S {BSC neVEHaC SIDE) C^^^il>*J "Blvd. SB. CITV AND STATE sc. 2)P COOE " a. CHIKF riKANCIAU OWWtCEH • A. S-TRCBIT ADDRK»» tSEE REVC^SE SI0£) flB. CITY ANO STAT^ .«C. ZIP CODE oo NOT ALTEH '^'^^!f f^,^.^^ THE CALIFORNIA CORPOHATION NAMED HEREIN, MAKES THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT aTRECT ADDREBB OF PRINCIPAI. OfTtCW <|«r MONC, COMPCETC (pa •IOT USE .P.O. OOX wo.> 3. MAlUNQ ADORB«S 3 Ooo •U1T» O" *OOM ftUITK OR nMM C>^l^k^ci, CA CITY-AND STATE CITY AND $Ti«TE 2a, ZIP CQPE as. IIP COPE DESIGNATED AGENT FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS p..^^, „,.n ITCMI 7 AHD a ON =..at o»' FOWM.) «. CAUfORNIA STRCCT ADDREBB IP ACENT IB AN INDIVIDUAL (DO NOT USK P.O. BOX, OO NOT INCLOOK AODR abo<; c^^tsh^d iKivJ. ESS ir' AO^NT IS A CORPOtTATIClM COMMON INTEREST DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION atctior. laso. .T .W,. CV.I. eopt TMIS COHPORATIDN .S NOT AN ASSOCIATION FORMKD TO MANA6E A COMMON INTEREST DEVKCOP*,ENT (IP THl* BOX IS CHfOKED, PROCKCO TO NUMBER If.) IO. ^^^^ CORPORATION IB A« ASSOCIATION FORMED TO MANACC A COMMON |NTER«T OCVELOPMBNT UNDER TMC C/sVr,-»TIRI.IN<5 LJ COMMON INTEREST pEvCLOPMSNT ACT. HF TNIS BOX IS c:H«CKED, COMPUETE IOA AfiO lOB.) I OA. m\ISmC*a OFFICE STRtie-r ADDRESS S£L PxVtlCAL UOCATION OP OEveL.ePMENT. INCLUDINO ZIP CODE 10B. NAME AND ADORKBS OF THE HANACINC ACENT II I DECLAPE THAT I HAVE p:XAMINED THIS STATEMENT AND TO THC BEST OP MY KNOWLBOC DATE TTPC OR PRINT NAME OP SIG^lNS OFFICt* OR AGENT t AND BELIt^,^ IS TRUE. COOA^T AND COMPLCTE, — r^ jZuji^ — • " 9ICNATUBB FORM S/O 100 (6/97) 10/06/99 13:57 0714 673 9267 T.B.P, g]001/002 FAX Memorandum Date: To: Attn: FAX: Proj: Prcj No.: From: cc: 10/06/99 City ofCarlsbad, Housing and Redevelopment 2966 Roosevelt Street, Suite B Carlsbad, CA 92008 Lorl Rosenstein, Management Analyst 760/720-2037 Army and Navy Academy Site and Street Improvements 99014.00 Robert Morales, tBP/Architecture Stephen Miller, ANA, fax: 760/720-7121 Ardutecnire Planning laterion Management Message/Memo: As discussed, attached is an additional document for inclusion to the Academy's planning submittal. The document ("Amendments to the Master Plan Phasing Schedule") describes the amendments/changes to the approved phasing schedule. The phasing schedule on the submitted drawing reflects the attached information, except for one item, the phase for the new tennis courts. The new tennis courts are to be completed in Phase 8 as was originally approved and as indicated on the phasing plan. Please call me with any comments or questions. tBP/Architecture 2300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach. OA. 92663 ph: 949 673 0300 fax: 949 673 9267 Welcome to Opotiki - The Pohu^^wa Tree ^ Page 1 of 2 Acconfimodation Attractions Free Stuff Guest book Home Map Page Pictures Real Estate Site search Web Site New Zealand Christmas Tree The pohutukawa or New Zealand Christmas Tree, metsiderosis excelsa, is one of the most outstanding plants of the entire New Zealand flora. A tougher or more adaptable coastal tree would be hard to find, for the pohutukawa will gain a foothold in the most inhospitable of rock crevices where continual lashings of salt-laden winds and drenchings of salt water are the norm, and life giving fresh water and nutrients are scarce in the \ extreme. Where the rocky coastal cliffsides of its northern habitat are particularly barren the pohutukawa grows as a solitary species, perching on seemingly impossible sites with its iong trailing roots seeking a foothold amongst the rocks. Where conditions are less severe the typical coastal forest of northern New Zealand consists mainly of karaka, kohekohe and puriri, in association with pohutukawa which is usually the dominant tree, in these mixed coastal forests the pohutukawa can grow into a spreading tree 20, metres or more in height, yet on very exposed rock faces where conditions are extremely barren it will at times grow little more than one metre, but will still flower profusely. The leaves of the pohutukawa are thick and tough, a shiny dark green on top and silvery white on their softer undersides. The flowers are well known to most New Zealanders, as the pohutukawa is a popular garden tree in all milder areas of the country. The spectacular dark crimson flowers occur just before Christmas and the flowering period extends well into January. The first settlers used pohutukawa blossom to decorate their homes at Christmas time, regarding it as a New Zealand substitute for holly, and it was they who first applied the now common name of Christmas tree. The pohutukawa was used for more than just decoration by the early pioneers. The potential of its strong durable timber for ship building was soon realized, and in the early days of colonization shiploads of pohutukawa timber were exported, severely depleting the magnificent stands of trees which at one time dominated the northern coasts. The leaves and bark of the pohutukawa were utilized for a variety of medicinal purposes by the Maori people, and many an early settler drank a decoction of inner bark of the pohutukawa tree to cure dysentery. The pohutukawas tolerance of extreme coastal conditions makes it an ideal choice for coastal planting. Its beauty means that it is favoured for planting in many situations where less hardy trees could be grown, but the pohutukawa is favoured because of its handsomeness. It is an amazingly adaptable tree and will thrive in almost any conditions. http://www.opotiki2.co.nz/data/pohutuka.htm 9/24/01 http://vmw.opotiki2.co.nz/data/oldtree.jpg 9/24/2001 Date: February 23, 2000 Planning Department - M. GRIM Police Departnient REDEVELOPMENT PERMIT fcc^VVty Ss^M^tV^ REVIEW AND COMMENT REOUEST ^MvTi Vo ^00^ \ W A Engineering Department - M. SHIREY Building Department - P. KELLEY City Attorney Water District - B. PL UIVCVIER Landscape Plancheck Consultant School District North County Transit District Fire Department - M. SMITH To Departments: Subject: RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 The attached plans have been resubmitted by the Army and Navy Academy for property located at 2585 Carlsbad Blvd. Please review the enclosed information and forward your comments on application completeness to my office by March 6, 2000. Thank you for your assistance. Project Title: Permit No.: Applicant: Army & Navy Academy (ANA) Dormitories RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 Army & Navy Academy Brief Description of Proposal: The existing Master Site Plan for Army and Navy Academy (RP94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP 94-02) includes a phasing plan linking the construction of new buildings with corresponding street improvements and the undergrounding of utilities. As a condition of the Master Site Plan approval, ANA must obtain discretionary approval prior to the construction of new buildings. This new project includes three new dormitories, a modified parking plan, proposed street improvements to Mountain View Road, an amendment to the approved Design Guidelines, and an amendment to the Phasing Plan. A more detailed description is included in the attached project description. The conditions of approval for the Master Site Plan (DRB Res. 233) were previously distributed for your use. A copy of the approved Master Plan was distributed to all departments during the preliminary review (PRE 99-33). Assigned staff member: Lori Rosenstein (Redevelopment) & Mike Grim (Planning) Comments: Please e-mail all comments to Lori Rosenstein in Housing & Redevelopment. 33,,^^ <f-^/^.^ ^-<^^-<^ http://wrww.pcurtis.com/nzimages/nz99-02w.jpg 9/24/2001 REDEVELOPMENT PERMIT REVIEW AND COMMENT REOUEST Date: October 6, 1999 Planning Department - M. GRIM V Water District - K. EFIMOFF Engineering Department - B. WOJCIK Landscape Plancheck Consultant Police Department School District Building Department North County Transit District City Attorney V Fire Department - M. SMITH To Departments: Subject: RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 The attached plans have been submitted by the Army and Navy Academy for property located at 2585 Carlsbad Blvd. Please review the enclosed information and forward your comments on application completeness to my office by October 22,1999. Thank you for your assistance. Project Title: Permit No.: Applicant: Army & Navy Academy (ANA) Dormitories RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 Army & Navy Academy Brief Description of Proposal: The existing Master Site Plan for Army and Navy Academy (RP94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP 94-02) includes a phasing plan linking the construction of new buildings with corresponding street improvements and the undergrounding of utilities. As a condition of the Master Site Plan approval, ANA must obtain discretionary approval prior to the construction of new buildings. This new project includes three new dormitories, a modified parking plan, proposed street improvements to Mountain View Road, an amendment to the approved Design Guidelines, and an amendment to the Phasing Plan. A more detailed description is included in the attached project description. The conditions of approval for the Master Site Plan (DRB Res. 233) have also been attached for your use. A copy of the approved Master Plan was distributed to all departments during the preliminary review (PRE 99-33). Assigned staff member: Lori Rosenstein (Redevelopment) & Mike Grim (Planning) Comments: Please send all comments to Lori Rosenstein in Housing & Redevelopment. Comments sent via e-mail are greatly appreciated! PROJECT DESCRIPTION/EXPLANATION PROJECT NAME: Army and Navy Academy Dormitory Buildings, Parking and Street Improvements APPLICANT NAME: Please describe fully the proposed project. Include any details necessary to adequately explain the scope and/or operation cf the proposed project You may also include any background information and supporting statements regarding the reasons for, or appropriateness of, the application. Use an addendum sheet if necessary. Description/Explanation: Proposed Buildings: Proposed Phase Parking: Subtotal Subtotal Total Parking Spaces: Proposed Phase 1 Street Improvements: Proposed Master Plan Amendments: 80 Bed Student Dormitory, Building 3A (Phase 1) 64 Bed Student Dormitory, Building 4 (Phase 3) 80 Bed Student Dormitory, Building 3B (Phase 8) 25 On-site Parking Spaces (Existing) 21 On-site Parking Spaces (Phase 1) 96 Parking Spaces -25 Demolish Spaces (Phase 7) 71 Parking Spaces 65 On-site Parking Spaces (Phase 9) 136 On-site Parking Spaces (Final Build-out) Street Improvements along Mountain View Drive. 1. Amendment to the Design Guidelines 2. Amendment to the Phasing Schedule 3. Revise number of "housed" students in on-site dormitories from 304 to 320 students at Master Plan "build-out". 10/06/99 13:57 ©714 673 9267 T.B.P. 002/002 o in Q < < < c i (3 O i a> cu cn O .4^ o oo o JC r- 1 p-( VO V U Vi tn c/> «J W ea ea x: U5 CL. CU c o c o O CO u C3 p. o E u CU CM E 8 e cd vn tl o o o o •5 Ul o ov od J3 Oi O I CU ov V J3 > •c > c c O o Q- E J 8 KJ 0) g •a c E O M c .2 "S. •n o •o <1> I ov o V) ei J:: •a cd M oa ei< vo" VJ .£= OH CU VI O o 4> Q g •> Cl. I ffi c Ov cu -o c CO a vs ee CU .5 M •— o Q (0 T3 US o c o cu ^ vo O 4> S CO Q Pu c B •o c u E cd 60 0) J: I o Ji Ou cn O '> E -a c: u e cd 00 e i -a cu Vi o eu 9) I <;> cn •a c g)vd 4> 0) a vo ^ o c ft-* -a 'C 3 O e o Ui Q D O g W Q tu Q < < < Q .iS > n. ^ 3 J= .«-> cn c/l .S 2P c a. ^ o "S J3 < > o cd J3 cn c 3 cd 60 S C ^ u cd Q. O a. o T3 cd CJ t4 J3 2 Z 2 2 cn = .s O .-3 > 60 •C3 .S 1) •*-> „ «30 5? (U cd ^ ? 5 ^ tn cn " .S w c ^ § w a. 53 o O 3 cd U E •5 o cd W 3 cd » • cd c Q 3 U — -5 c ts •* cd I? -S .2 c s o "cd CJ ••s dj > 00 cd T3 cd 3 a 43 J5 •«-> U E o 00 .|).S '35 "O 3 JO 00 c J3 o 3 »- J:: U 03 CJ vi > ;:3 5 cu c -o •> " cd CJ o o -a T3 43 cn cn 43 CJ 43 JS OO c/3 ^ 2 I - VJ <u ^ 43 -a cd CJ 00 2 -a cd ed >M cn ^ 2 o, ^ 2 o 3 ^ c 43 a c Cd cn 3 O c cn P J: 2 •a "o cn 12 §•1 43 "ts O cn •«-» b. •i ^ 3 O cn J2 O > 3 O CU 7- »rf Q -3 O ^ 6 -o -O CJ 43 T3 Cd o 43 ^ 43 O 04 c CJ 43 43 11 o J3 00' c 3 x> 43 JS « C4-I o o c o O .2 cn 2 Ui 43 -O ^ O, 3 O 3 =5 O J3 JO 00 3 CM vi O <J3 cS C 5* f43 3 03 1) Ui 43 43 J= J3 3 O JS CM O q J3 cn 00 00 c c '-B "-a .S* .-3 JS 43 cu "vi S i £ -I t en cd o o a; CM O 43 !=; cd CJ en 43 n CJ 4) M •M Cd 43 jS 43 43 •S -43 ^ cn P 3 O CU — S5 C3 4) CM O "O o -M Cd u. CJ u Cd en ^> 2 3 43 s _4J 43 3 .00 *e75 43 Cd J -3 «^ C .> Cd w 4) £ 3 u 5 en 1 '5 ll •3 J5 00 3 3 '-^ "3 • = M"-S 0 43 T-1 1 «•§ :y3 Q. Cd S Q. :^ ••^ -s ^ t: « ed cn J3 € 43 ,0 "43 cii M 2 c> •s ^ 0,-5 43 •-(-> ^ 55 O 43 -3 S 2: i cn O CM O O M -< '-3 PUBLIC WORKS LAND DEVELOPMENT SECTION MEMORANDUM October 28, 1999 TO: MANAGEMENT ANALYST - LORI ROSENSTEIN FROM: Associate Engineer - Land Development RP 99-14, CDP 99-49: ARMY/NAVY ACADEMY 1999 - DORMITORIES COMPLETENESS REVIEW Engineering Department staff have completed a review of the above-referenced project for application 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: 1. In general, the plans need to be brought up to site plan submittal quality. These plans are acceptable for an overview of the entire project site. But since the applicant is proposing actual construction of buildings, the plans must be able to be reviewed for actual engineering issues of concern. To accomplish this, the plans must have a design element to them. They do not have to be full construction improvement drawings, but they do need to be much more than hand drafted schematics. So, at a minimum, areas that are being submitted for actual entitlement must be submitted as design quality plans for staff to be able to adequately review them. 2. Please indicate the project's Average Daily Traffic (ADT) per San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) criteria. 3. Please submit the project on standard 24" x 36" plan sheets. Use match/cut lines if necessary. 4. Please indicate discretionary applications RP 99-14 and CDP 99-49 on the site plan. 5. The easement information that was submitted is from the 1996 submittal. This information must be updated in accordance with the current Preliminary Title Report (PR). Additionally, in 1996, the format that this information was submitted in was acceptable because nothing was being constructed. Now that actual buildings are being proposed, this information must be more clearly shown (See Issue No. 1 above). 6. Please clearly show all existing and proposed street light standards and fire hydrants. 7. Existing topography, vegetation, structures, etc., and proposed grading contours must be clearly shown. 8. Grading quantities must be more clearly indicated. For example, what is the row indicated as "Whole Project" representing? 9. Please show spot elevations, finished grade, and finished floor elevations. RP 99-14, CDP 99-49: ARMY/NAVY ACADEMY 1999 COMPLETENESS REVIEW L. ROSENSTEIN MEMO; OCTOBER 28,1999 10. Please indicate existing and proposed on-site drainage patterns. 11. Please label the 100-year flood line and/or wave run-up elevations. Provide a hydrology report regarding this information. 12. If traffic volumes are over 500 ADT, please submit a traffic study. 13. Please submit a preliminary soils report. 14. Please be advised, depending on how the applicant wishes to process this application, some of the above information may not be required. However, if the existing Master Plan and Phasing plan are being amended, then this information must be submitted. 15. For the above reasons, engineering issues of concern could not be addressed. Engineering issues will be reviewed once the above information is submitted and the application is deemed complete. If you have any questions, please call me at extension 4388. MICHAEL J. SHIREY Associate Engineer - Land Development c: Deputy City Engineer - Land Development Lori Rosenstein - Army/Navy Academy Page 1 From: To: Date: Subject: Lori: Mike Grim Lori Rosenstein 11/1/99 2:03PM Army/Navy Academy' I concur with Mike Shirey's comments - we need more complete and legible plans to review, plus a complete and accurate project description. What do they want to accomplish with this submittal? What is there timing on the current phase of construction? As we discussed over the phone, these guys need to think about what they want to do and THEN we can give them processing advice...until then, I don't really have any issues. Thanks a lot, Mike 00: Chris DeCerbo Transmittal Date: 11/09/99 To: The City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carisbad, Califomia 92008 Attn: Dave Howser, Deputy City Engineer Proj: Master Plan and Development Submittal Amiy and Navy Academy Proj No.: 99014.00 From: Robert Morales, tBP/Architecture cc: Lori Rosenstein, City of Carlsbad Housing and Redevelopment Signature: Architecture Planning Interiors Mans^pement Transmitting OI Change Orders • I Prints m I Construction Docs im I Specifications •Il I Copy of Letter CJW Submittal 01 Under Separate Cover O I Shop Drawings [Z]| Samples OI Preliminary Drawings ol Diskettes •1 I Other Qty Description 3 Folded prints of submitted planning drawings AS-2, AS-3, AS4, AS-5, AS-7 AND AS-8 1 Project Description/Explanation, Location Map Message The attached information is submitted for engineering review per our previous conversation. CaH me with any comments or questions. • • • • For Your Use Approved as Corrected Approved Correct & Return For Approval Please Retum • | U.P.S. di I U.P.S. Overnight • I U.P.S. 2"^ Day • I Fed Ex O I O.C.B. Delivery tBP Delivery O I U.S. Mail • tBP/Architecture 2300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA. 92663 ph: 949 673 0300 fax: 949 673 9267 CARLSBAD FIRE DEPARTMENT Fire Protection Services DEVELOPMENTAL PLAN REVIEW REPORT PROJECTNAME: Army Navy Academy Date: 11-21-99 Project number: Planning CDP 99-49 Engineering Redev RP 99-14 Type of review: Preliminary / Initial y Project conditions Initial review: (Note: This commentary identifies fire protection issues associated with the project, and/or prescribes specific corrections needed to achieve Fire Department approval.) 1. All proposed new buildings exceeding 10,000 square feet in area must be protected by an automatic flre sprinkler system. 2. Per the Carlsbad Municipal Code, automatic fire sprinklers must be installed throughout an existing building if the area of that building is increased, and the building area resulting from that increase exceeds 10,000 square feet. 3. Details of proposed building areas, emergency access, building set-backs, dimensions, and other important architectural details are not clear. 4. Additional emergency access and fire hydrants will be required. Lon pQ3gpjgtgfj:^T^pg9:^4j^^ gg^g Arjg^^TAcademy I Page 1 From: To: Date: Subject: Mike Smith Lori Rosenstein, Mike Grim 11/21/99 3:07PM RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 Army Navy Academy I know we are way behind on this one. We finally gave up trying to figure out exactly what they are doing. They need a clearer plan, order of work, etc. How about a few dimensions, that might be nice. I can't do much better for comments than what I have enclosed. They are general, and I would be happy to meet with them to explain our needs. If they blow up about the sprinkler requirements tell them to call me. You should know that we are going to require their master plan to equip every dorm room on the campus with sprinklers. This is the only site in the city that causes me to lose sleep. Thanks iTori Rosenstein - RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 Jjjk^ Page 1 From: Kelly Weaver To: Lori Rosenstein Date: 1/10/0011:01AM Subject: RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 Army & Navy Academy Dormitories CMWD 99-C.539 From our review of the submitted documents, no public facilties are proposed to serve the new dormitories. Therefore, CMWD has no comments on the subject project. If a new water service or sewer lateral is proposed and not shown, CMWD will comment on the new connections. Kelly Weaver, P.E. Associate Engineer CMWD 5950 El Camino Real Carisbad CA 92008 (760) 438-3367 x7124 ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY Inspiring Excellence Since 1910 February 3, 2000 City of Carlsbad 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B Carlsbad, CA 92018 ATTN: Lori Rosenstein, Management Analyst RE: Traffic Information Request Planning Submittal Comment Dear Ms. Rosenstein: This letter is in response to the City Engineering Department's Comment No. 2 (average daily traffic information). The Army and Navy Academy reviewed the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) for the design submitted to the City for our Master Plan Amendments. The submitted design does not increase the ADT from the previous Master Plan approved by the City. If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call me at (760) 729-2385. lincerely, COL Stephen A. Miller President Post Office Box 3000 Carlsbad, CA 92018 (760) 729-2385 Fax (760) 434-1890 www.army-navyacademy.com tBP/Architecture Architecture Planning Interiors Management RECEIVED February 10, 2000 Housing and Development Department ^ ^ City of Carlsbad CITY OF CARLSBAO 2%5 Roosevelt Street, Suite B HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT Carlsbad, CA 92018 DETORTMENT Attn: Lori Rosenstein, Management Analyst Re: RP99-14/CDP99-49 Resubmittal Response Army and Navy Academy tBP P/N 99014.00 Dear Ms. Rosenstein: In response to the City of Carlsbad's comments dated October 29, 1999, we resubmit the following as our written responses: ENGINEERING COMMENTS 1. Ouaiity of drawings: We have provided separate CADD site plans for Phase 1, Phase 3 and Phase 8. These plans include more detailed information as requested. 2. Traffic Information: The Academy acknowledged that the Average Daily Traffic will not be increased by the project(s) in a separate letter to Lori Rosenstein. 3. Drawing Size: Per conversations with Mike Shirey and Lori Rosenstein, drawings wiU be as follows: A. Site and building plans will be submitted for planning and construction permits on 30" X 42" drawings sheets. B. Street improvement plans will be submitted to the City engineering at a future time for construction permits on 24" x 36" drawing sheets. 4. Application Number: Phase 1, Phase 3 and Phase 8 site plans have numbers indicated in the Sheet Title Block. 5. Easement Information: We included a recent Encumbrance Plat and Title Report in our drawing resubmittal. 6. Street Lights and Fire Hydrants: Per review of the City's standards, we indicated the following on our site plan drawings: Street Lights: New street lights are indicated with street improvements in Phase 3 and Phase 8. 2300 Newport Boulevard • Newport Beach, GA 92663-3799 • Phone: (949) 673-0300 • Fax: (949) 673-9267 Lori Rosenstein, Management Analyst Housing and Development Department City of Carlsbad Page 2 of 3 Fire Hydrants: Existing street and on-site fire hydrants are indicated. Due to locations of the proposed dormitory buildings and existing fire hydrants, we indicate no new fire hydrants. 7. Grading Information: Indicated on site plans. 8. Grading Quantities: Revised on Sheet AS-1 project data. 9. See Comment #8 10. See Comment #8 11. Hydrology Report: Per a conversation with Mike Shirey, we indicated on the Phasing Plan (Sheet AS-2), which Phases are for site plan approval (Phase 1, Phase 3 and Phase 8). Mike's concem is for approval conditions of Phase 4 (property on the ocean side of Ocean Street). 12. Traffic Study: See comment #2. 13. Soils Report: We have submitted two (2) copies of a soil report with our resubmittal documents. 14. Application Process: No comment. 15. Review Note: No comment. HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMENTS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Application Fee; I spoke to Lori and clarified that the $400 fee was submitted to the City. She researched her file and found the receipt. Application Signature: Academy provided with resubmittal. Application Signature: Academy provided with resubmittal. Application Signature: Academy provided with resubmittal. Application Signature: Academy provided with resubmittal. Drawing Date; Added to drawings. Lori Rosenstein, Management Analyst Housing and Development Department City of Carlsbad Page 3 of 3 7. Application Numbers: Added to drawings. 8. Sewer Note: Revised on drawings. 9. Spelling: Revised on drawing. 10. Site Plan Information: Site plans revised. 11. Room Square Footages: Added to floor plan. 12. Original Master Plan Drawings: tBP Drawings removed as requested by City. 13. Design Guidelines: Provide with resubmittal. Very Truly Yours, tBP/Architecture cc: orales. Project Architect Col. Steven Miller, Army & Navy Academy Anthony DePaola, tBP/Architecture RM:lkb Transmittal Date: To: Attn: Proj: Proj No.: From: cc: Signature: 02/10/00 The City of Carlsbad Housing and Redevelopment Department 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B Carlsbad, Califomia 92008 Lori Rosenstein, Management Analysis Master Plan and Development Submittal Army and Navy Academy 99014.00 Robert Morales, tBP/Architecture Col. Steven MiUer, Army and Navy Academy Anthony DePaola, tPB/Architecture Transmitting I 11 Change Orders • • | Prints IZ] I 11 Construction Docs • I I I Specifications I I Architecture Planning Interiors Management RECEIVED FEB 10 2000 CITY OF CARLSBAD HOUSINGS REDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Copy of Letter Submittal Under Separate Cover Shop Drawings I 11 Samples I 11 Preliminary Drawings I 11 Diskettes • 1 other Qty Description 8 Prints of 30"x 42" revised planning drawings 1 Revised project description/explanation 3 Revised Amendments to the Design Guidelines 2 Preliminary Geotechnical Report by Kleinfelder, Inc. 1 Signed/completed Disclosure Statement and Land Use Application 1 Letter from the Army and Navy Academy regarding traffic information 1 City appUcation requirements dated October 29, 1999 1 tBP's response to the City's comments dated October 29, 1999 Message The attached information is submitted for the City's review per your correspondence to me dated October 29, 1999. Call the Academy or myself with any comments or questions. • • • • For Your Use Approved as Corrected Approved Correct & Return For Approval Please Return • • • • U.P.S. U.P.S. Overnight U.P.S. 2 Fed Ex nd Day • • • O.C.B. Delivery tBP Delivery U.S. Mail tBP/Architecture 2300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA. 92663 ph: 949 673 0300 fax: 949 673 926' REDEVELOPMENT PERMIT REVIEVy^ AND COMMENT REOUEST Date: February 23, 2000 V Planning Department - M. GRIM Water District - B. PLUMMER V Engineering Department - M. SHIREY Landscape Plancheck Consultant Police Department School District V Building Department - P. KELLEY North County Transit District City Attorney Fire Department - M. SMITH To Departments: Subject: RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 The attached plans have been resubmitted by the Army and Navy Academy for property located at 2585 Carlsbad Blvd. Please review the enclosed information and forward your comments on application completeness to my office by March 6, 2000. Thank you for your assistance. Project Title: Permit No.: Applicant: Army & Navy Academy (ANA) Dormitories RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 Army & Navy Academy Brief Description of Proposal: The existing Master Site Plan for Army and Navy Academy (RP94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP 94-02) includes a phasing plan linking the construction of new buildings with corresponding street improvements and the undergrounding of utilities. As a condition of the Master Site Plan approval, ANA must obtain discretionary approval prior to the construction of new buildings. This new project includes three new dormitories, a modified parking plan, proposed street improvements to Mountain View Road, an amendment to the approved Design Guidelines, and an amendment to the Phasing Plan. A more detailed description is included in the attached project description. The conditions of approval for the Master Site Plan (DRB Res. 233) were previously distributed for your use. A copy of the approved Master Plan was distributed to all departments during the preliminary review (PRE 99-33). Assigned staff member: Lori Rosenstein (Redevelopment) & Mike Grun (Plarming) Comments: Please e-mail all comments to Lori Rosenstein in Housing & Redevelopment. 'WWrMIP^M^ mil II lllll iliMMwwHff^^ From: Pat Kelley To: Lori Rosenstein Date: 2/28/00 9:31AM Subject: RP 99-14 / CDP 99-49 Lori -1 don't have much to do w/ the phasing. It looks like it's geared towards Engineering requirements (when they are installed). My comments therefore are limited to UBC issues I can see. The plans are somewhat vague as to content, so these comment should not be construed as complete building department plan review comments. Phase 1 Site accessibility - 1. The proposed new parking lot on the east side of Mt View need h-cap accessible space(s). 2. Remodeled Existing Admin & Cafeteria BIdg will require a building permit This remodel will trigger access upgrades to this structure as well, (residential to office use). Plans do not have detailing , so further comments are not possible. 3. Looks like they are proposing a partial demolition of one existing dorm room to fit a new building on the site. This partially demolished structure should be analyzed and they will need to secure a permit for modifying this structure. 4. New dorm building must meet h-cap standards for "covered multi-family dwellings" per State Building Code Chapter 11 A. It does not appear the building is served by an accessible ramp. The structure does not appear to include sanitary facilities for h-cap, but the detailing is again vague. 5. It should be clearly noted that the temporary modulars come out on this phase. Part of the footprint of these temporary buildings is outside the dotted line on AS-3. Phase 3 1. Ramp access to new dorm is not shown. 2. Plan shows they want to put a retaining wall at the foundation of an existing building. This requires an engineering analysis and a separate building permit for modifying that structure. 3. Planning recently changed the definition of basement in the zone code. Not sure now if the phase 3 dorm qualifies as a basement building or a three story building. 4. Multi-purpose room in basement presents an exiting challenge at least No exits are shown on the plan. 5. This structure is again a "covered multi-family dwelling" and an elevator building. In fact inclusion ofthe elevator and the bridges connecting the other dorms to this building , makes all the other upper floors of the new dorms "covered" by access regulations. That's all I can see given the details. More in Building Permit plan check I am sure. The h-cap regs have changed a great deal since the last dorm they built. (More restrictive - more access features required). I'll send the plans back to you. Pat 03/13/00 12:03 ©714 673 9267 T.B.P. 1001/004 FAX Memorandum Date: To: Attn: FAX: Proj: Proj No. From: cc: 03/13/00 City of Carlsbad, Housmg and Redevelopment 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B Carlsbad, CA 92008 Lori Rosenstein, Management Analyst 760/720-2037 Army and Navy Academy Site and Street Improvements 99014.00 Robert Morales, tBP/Architectuie Col. Stephen MiDer, Army and Navy Academy, fax 760-720-7121 Anthony DePaola, tBP/Architectuie Architeccure Planning Inceriors Management IVIessage/Memos As discussed, attached are three (3) pages with dormitory bed count lists for Phase 1, Phase 3, and Phase 8 of the Master Plan, Tiiese pages are added to the Academy's submittal. I have mailed you originals of each page for your records. Please do not hesitate to call me with any comments or questions at 949/673-0300. MAR 13 2000 tBP/Architecture 2300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach/ CA- 92663 ph: 949 673 0300 fax: 949 673 9267 03/13/00 12:03 0714 673 9267 T.B.P, 1002/004 Army and Navy Academy tBP P/N 99014.00 March 13, 2000 Phase 1 Campus Master Plan Dormitory Bed Count per Phase RECEIVED MAR 13 2000 CITYOFCARLSBAD HOUSINGS REDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Building # Existing Beds # Proposed Beds Total Bed5 Dormitories Proposed Building 0 80 80 Hoover Hall (demo 2 rooms) 24 •4 20 McClendon HaU (demo 2 rooms 24 •A 20 Donnan Hall (fire damaged) 28 -28 0 Lewis Hall 16 0 16 Mcintosh Hall 16 0 16 Atkinson HaU 32 0 32 Ci^anHall 64 0 64 Anderson HaU 24 0 24 Cottage 1 8 0 8 Cottage 2 8 0 8 Cottage 3 8 0 8 Cottage 4 8 0 8 Cottages 8 0 8 Cottage 6 8 0 8 Cottage? 8 0 8 TOTALS 284 44 328 03/13/00 12:03 ©714 673 9267 _ T.B.P. [2]003/004 Army and Navy Academy tBP P/N 99014.00 March 13,2000 Campus Master Plan Dormitory Bed Count per Phase mr Phase 3 Building # Existing Beds # Proposed Beds Total Beds Dormitories Proposed Building 0 64 64 Phase 1 Building 80 0 80 Hoover Hall 20 0 20 McClendon HaU 20 0 20 Lewis HaU 16 0 16 Mcintosh HaU 16 0 16 Atkinson HaU 32 0 32 Crean HaU 64 0 64 Anderson HaU (Ph. 2 demo) 24 -24 0 Conage 1 (Ph. 2 demo) 8 -8 0 Cottage 2 (Ph. 2 demo) 8 ^8 0 Cottage 3 (Ph, 2 demo) 8 -8 0 Cottage 4 (Ph. 2 demo) 8 -8 0 Cottage 5 (Ph. 2 demo) 8 -8 0 Cottage 6 (Ph. 2 demo) 8 0 8 Cottage 7 (Ph, 2 demo) 8 0 8 TOTALS 328 0 328 03/13/00 12:04 ®714 673 9267 T.B.P. @]004/004 Army and Navy Academy tBP P/N 99014,00 March 13, 2000 Campus Master Plan Dormitory Bed Count per Phase "^1^ 132000 Phase 8 Building # Existing Beds U Proposed Beds Total Beds Dormitories Proposed BuUding 0 80 80 Phase 1 Building 80 0 80 Phase 3 BuUdiqg 64 0 64 Hoover HaU (demo) 20 -20 0 McClendon HaU (demo) 20 -20 0 Lewis Hall (demo) 16 -16 0 Mcintosh HaU (demo) 16 -16 0 Atkinson HaU (demo) 32 0 32 Crean HaU (demo) 64 0 64 Cottage 6 (demo) 8 -8 0 Cottage 7 (demo) 8 -8 0 TOTALS 328 -8 320 REDEVELOPMENT PERMIT REVIEW AND COMMENT REOUEST Date: March 14, 2000 V Planning Department - M. GRIM Water District - B. PLUMMER Engineering Department - M. SHIREY Landscape Plancheck Consultant Police Department School District Building Department North County Transit District City Attorney Fire Department - M. SMITH To Departments: Subject: RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 I just received the attached information from the applicant pertaining to the dormitory bed counts for Phase 1, Phase 3, and Phase 8. In light of this new information I have extended the review period two weeks. Please review the enclosed information and forward your comments on application completeness to my office by March 20, 2000. Thank you for your assistance. Project Title: Permit No.: Applicant: Army & Navy Academy (ANA) Dormitories RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 Army & Navy Academy Brief Description of Proposal: The existing Master Site Plan for Army and Navy Academy (RP94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP 94-02) includes a phasing plan linking the construction of new buildings with corresponding street improvements and the undergrounding of utilities. As a condition of the Master Site Plan approval, ANA must obtain discretionary approval prior to the construction of new buildings. This new project includes three new dormitories, a modified parking plan, proposed street improvements to Mountain View Road, an amendment to the approved Design Guidelines, and an amendment to the Phasing Plan. A more detailed description is included in the attached project description. The conditions of approval for the Master Site Plan (DRB Res. 233) were previously distributed for your use. A copy of the approved Master Plan was distributed to all departments during the preliminary review (PRE 99-33). Assigned staff member: Lori Rosenstein (Redevelopment) & Mike Grun (Planning) Comments: Please e-mail all comments to Lori Rosenstein in Housing & Redevelopment. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION MEMORANDUM March 22, 2000 TO: MANAGEMENT ANALYST - LORI ROSENSTEIN FROM: Associate Engineer - Development Services Division RP 99-14, CDP 99-49: ARMY/NAVY ACADEMY 1999 - MPA & DORMITORIES SECOND COMPLETENESS REVIEW Engineering Department staff have completed a second review of the above-referenced project for application completeness and have determined that the application and plans submitted for the project are stiil incomplete and unsuitable for continued review due to the following incomplete items: 1. As previously indicated, in general, the plans need to be brought up to site plan submittal quality. These plans are acceptable for an overview of the entire project site. But since the applicant is proposing actual construction of buildings, the plans must be able to be reviewed for engineering issues of concern. To accomplish this, the plans must have a design element to them. They do not have to be full construction improvement drawings, but they do need more legible detail. The applicant did supply additional information on the existing plan sheets, but there is still not enough detail to enable standard engineering review. For example, sheet AS-3 indicates, "drainage structure through/below stairs to swale." Engineering staff must be able to actually review a design parameter like this, rather than iust reading a note. So, at a minimum, areas that are being submitted for actual entitlement must be submitted as design quality plans, at a 1" = 20' or 40' scale, for staff to be able to adequately review them. 2. As previously requested, please indicate the project's Average Daily Traffic (ADT) per San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) criteria. Submitting a letter stating that there is no increase in ADT may be acceptable, but the ADT still must be indicated on the actual site plan. Since this is a Master Plan (MP) amendment, and a traffic report was conducted with the originai MP, a letter submitted from the previous traffic engineer indicating that there are no changes, or that there is less traffic than was generated for the previous MP, will be acceptable. The letter should reference the previous traffic report, and a copy of the previous report should be submitted. 3. As previously requested, please indicate discretionary review applications RP 99-14 and CDP 99-49 on the site plan. (The applicants re-submittal letter stated that this information was Indicated in the Phase 1, 3 & 8 "title block," however staff could not locate it.) Additionally, this information should be indicated on every sheet of the site plan, not just certain individual sheets. RP 99-14, CDP 99-49: ARMY/NAVY ACADEMY 1999 SECOND COMPLETENESS REVIEW L. ROSENSTEIN MEMO; MARCH 22, 2000 4. As previously indicated, the easement information that was shown as part of the first check was from the 1996 submittal. This time, the easement information shown was from a Preliminarv Title Report (PR) dated Januarv 10. 1994. The information that needs to be shown is from the PR that was submitted with the original 1999 project dated August 11, 1999. Also, the 1994 PR was copied onto a plan sheet (sheet C- 2). This is unnecessary. Therefore, what needs to be done is, fully and accurately plot the easements on the site plan, and, show each easement's recording information, from the 1999 PR, either in an easement table with corresponding numbers next to the easement, or, at each easement, in plan view. 5. Thank you for showing the existing fire hydrant locations. However, as previously requested, proposed street light standards still need to be shown (as well as proposed improvements). 6. As previously requested, existing topography and structures and proposed grading contours must be cleariy shown. For example, the existing campus plan is incorrect. It already shows the Phase 1 improvements, instead of the modular buildings. Also, there are no elevations indicated on the contour lines on the existing campus plan. On sheet AS-3, handwritten spot elevations have been shown around the Phase 1 building, all at an elevation of 50.84'. How is this area supposed to drain? Are the numerous numbers, located on the Phase 1 site plan (sheet AS-3), spot elevations? Also one arrow labeled "drainage" is insufficient to show actual drainage patterns for the site. Please see Issue No. 1 above, regarding plan preparation. 7. Please provide documentation that the project architect/engineer is coordinating with City design consulting engineer, Doug Helming, of Helming Engineering, inc., regarding the Army/Navy Mountain View improvements and the City's Carisbad Boulevard street and bridge improvements. Design information for the Carisbad Boulevard improvements must be shown on the site plan. 8. Even though the applicant is amending the MP, hydrology information does not have to be submitted or shown on the plans at this time. However, hydrology information will be required when an application for discretionary review for the property located on the west side of Ocean Street (proposed Phase 4) is processed. 9. For the above reasons, specific engineering issues of concern still could not be addressed. Engineering issues will be reviewed once the above information is submitted and the application is deemed complete. However, so that the project can keep moving fonA/ard, and as a courtesy to the applicant, the following is a major issue that should be looked at and worked on now. RP 99-14, CDP 99-49: ARMY/NAW ACADEMY 1999 SECOND COMPLETENESS REVIEW L. ROSENSTEIN MEMO; MARCH 22, 2000 Maior Issue of Concern 1. The approved Phasing Plan, and project Conditions of Approval, require the developer to install street improvements (including under-grounding of overhead utilities) concurrent with any development. The current proposal indicates that the installation of street improvements does not occur until Phase 3. This proposal does not meet City Code and is not in accordance with what was previously agreed to with the Army/Navy Academy (as indicated by the previous Engineering Conditions of Approval), and therefore, cannot be supported by staff. Street improvements must be installed concurrent with any development. Since the first phase of development is along Pacific Avenue, the improvement requirement is to improve all of Pacific Avenue (including under-grounding of overhead utilities) along with any requisite transitions. This is a standard improvement requirement, in accordance with City Code, and again, must be completed concurrent with development. Subsequent phasing will also have to include street improvements along the street where the development is proposed. Additionally, the improvements must be shown on the site plan, in plan and typical section views. Engineering staff suggests that the applicant set-up a meeting with redevelopment, and include planning and engineering, to discuss all of the project completeness and plan preparation issues in one setting. Engineering staff will make themselves available for any meeting. If you or the applicant have any questions, please either e-mail or call me at 602-2747. MICHAEL J. SHIREY Associate Engineer - Development Services Division c: Deputy City Engineer - Development Services Division Lon Rosenstein - Army Navy Academy Page 1 y A From: Bill Plummer To: Lori Rosenstein Date: 4/7/00 4:17PM Subject: Army Navy Academy Responding to request for comments: 1. Project shall be planned to use recycled water for onsite irrigation. 2. Two new water meters and services required one for potable water to buildings and one for irrigation system. 3. Improvements to Mountain View Drive: Relocation of existing water appurtenances are required. Existing water pipeline may need to be relocated and the size increased depending on fire flow requirements. Sewer laterals may need to be installed for buildings to receive sewer service. New sewer access hole is required depending on sewer lateral size and locations. flH'Hosenste^^ forth'^ ^>^>^ - ^||j77WQa:^ p^^^ ^ | From: Pat Kelley To: Lori Rosenstein Date: 7/11/00 11:58AM Subject: Plans for the ANA - RP 99-14 / CDP 99-49 The plans are still pretty vague and incomplete as you know Lori. I'll try to list the major comments I have without being redundant 1. The Mt View parking area still does not have adequate H'cap parking. Please suggest the architect consult State Code Section 1129B; Table 11B-6 for the correct accessible parking ratios in each lot. 2. The civil site plan does not show the illegal structure (the archery range enclosure) for which they were recently sent a violation notice. If it is intended the illegal structures will remain, the site plan should show all proposed structures. I have some concerns about their commitment to and knowledge of the accessibility issues. In that regard, please add a project condition that explicitly has all new work for the project (buildings and site work) in compliance with the latest version of the Califomia Building Code Accessibility Standards. The rest will happen in building plan check if and when the project goes there. Pat PS - plans in transit via interoffice snail mail Metrosideros excelsus (Metrosideros tomentosus) New Zealand Christmas Tree, Pohutukawa Myrtaceae A large shrub to medium size evergreen tree, growing 15-30 ft. and higher, with an equal spread. Foliage is comprised of deep green leaves that have white fuzz on the edges and undersides. Colorful red flowers have many stamens and occur in spring to early summer. This species is native to coastal edges and forests on the North Island of New Zealand. It grows in sand dunes and on cliffs within range of salt spray and persistent onshore winds. The maritime climate of this region keeps summer temperatures mild. Rainstorms are frequent throughout the year; there is seldom frost. In westem gardens, this species is best suited to coastal zones ranging from the Pacific Northwest to San Diego. These plants grow faster and to larger sizes with regular water, however, established plants do fme with little supplemental water. This is a popular plant for use as a street, residential patio, or court- yard tree. It can be clipped as well and be used for screens and hedges. Large specimens with handsome trunk character can be seen in parks and residential gardens. They often have aerial roots in areas of frequent fog and high humidity. M. e. 'Aurea' is a cultivar that produces yellow flowers; M. e. 'Variegata' has yellow color markings on the leaves. Plates 717-719. 717. Metrosideros excelsus 718. Metrosideros excelsus 719. Metrosideros excelsus, North Cape, New Zealand REDEVELOPMENT PERMIT REVIEW AND COMMENT REOUEST Date: November 22, 2000 V Planning Department - M. GRIM Water District V Engineering Department - M. SHIREY Landscape Plancheck Consultant - L. BLACK Police Department School District V Building Department - P. KELLEY North County Transit District City Attorney V Fire Department - M. SMITH To Departments: Subject: RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 The attached plans and corresponding documents have been resubmitted by the Army and Navy Academy for property located at 2585 Carlsbad Blvd. Please review the enclosed information and forward your comments on application completeness and issues of concem to my office by December 6, 2000. Thank you for your assistance. Project Title: Permit No.: Applicant: Army & Navy Academy (ANA) Dormitories RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 Army & Navy Academy Brief Description of Proposal: The applicant has reduced the scope of the project to include a two-story (35 foot high), 80-bed dormitory on the south side of Pacific Avenue and a 48-space parking lot on the northwesterly comer of Mountain View Drive and Carlsbad Blvd. Assigned staff member: Lori Rosenstein (Redevelopment) & Mike Grim (Planning) Comments: Please e-mail all comments to Lori Rosenstein in Housing & Redevelopment. REDEVELOPMENT PERMIT REVIEW AND COMMENT REOUEST Date: July 10, 2000 Planning Department - M. GRIM Water District V Engineering Department - M. SHIREY Landscape Plancheck Consultant Police Department School District Building Department - P. KELLEY North County Transit District City Attorney Fire Department - M. SMITH To Departments: Subject: RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 The attached plans have been resubmitted by the Army and Navy Academy for property located at 2585 Carlsbad Blvd. Please review the enclosed information and forward your comments on application completeness to my office by July 21, 2000. Thank you for your assistance. Project Title: Permit No.: Applicant: Army & Navy Academy (ANA) Dormitories RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 Army & Navy Academy Brief Description of Proposal: The applicant has reduced the scope of the project to include a two-story (35 foot high), 80-bed dormitory on the south side of Pacific Avenue and a 48 space parking lot on the northwesterly comer of Mountain View Drive and Carlsbad Blvd. Assigned staff member: Lori Rosenstein (Redevelopment) & Mike Grim (Planning) Comments: Please e-mail all comments to Lori Rosenstein in Housing & Redevelopment. PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING/DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MEMORANDUM December 6, 2000 TO: LORI ROSENSTEIN - HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT FROM: Associate Engineer - Engineering/Development Services RP 99-14, CDP 99-49: ARMY/NAVY ACADEMY (ANA) 1999 - MPA & DORMITORIES SECOND ISSUES REVIEW Engineering Department staff have completed a fourth review (second actual issues review) of the above-referenced project. Prior to engineering staff making a determination on the project, the following engineering issues of concern must be resolved/adequately addressed: Traffic & Transportation 1. Thank you for fully dimensioning the proposed parking lot. My redline check prints indicated that drive aisles must have a minimum width of 24'. The proposed widths range from 22' to 24'. Also, my redlines indicated that parking stalls must have a minimum length of 20' Two of the parking stall areas show a minimum 19' length. Unless these are supposed to be compact spaces, this does not meet City Standards and must be revised. And, in any event, the drive aisle must be revised to a 24' minimum width. 2. Thank you for providing caicuiations showing that the proposed retention basin is of sufficient size to retain a 10-Year storm event, in accordance with the Local Coastal Program. However, the data in the report was calculated using information contained in the Orange County l-lydrology Manual. The information that must be used to prepare the report is the San Diego Hydrology Manual. Although both manuals are valid, the data contained therein is not exactly the same. Projects in Carisbad are required to use San Diego County information. Now, regarding the report, there are some issues as follows: a. The report indicates that the depth of the proposed basin, to retain a 10-year storm event, must be 6'. The plans show a depth of less than half of a foot (0.4'); b. The report also indicates that the size of the basin that is required "is a little larger than shown on the site plan." Staff has concerns over this issue. If the retention basin needs to be deeper and larger, and, with the parking spaces and drive aisles already not meeting the correct lengths and widths, respectively, what effect will these revisions have on the parking lot layout and number of parking spaces? Will these changes necessitate further encroachment into the off-site slope? 3. Thank you for adding the typical street sections for Pacific Avenue and Mountain View Drive on civil plan sheet 4. Please revise the "future" curb to curb and right of way widths for Mountain View Drive to 20'/30', respectively. This is not a cul-de-sac street, and therefore, must meet Local Street Standards. Also, revise the Civil, Architectural and Landscape plan view widths/design to meet Local Street Standards. RP 99-14, CDP 99-49: ARM^AVY ACADEMY (ANA) 1999 SECOND ISSUES REVIEW L. ROSENSTEIN MEMO; DECEMBER 6, 2000 Sewer & Water 1. Thank you for providing the correspondence from Mr. David Nack, P.E., regarding the need for a new sewer lateral to the proposed building. However, the explanation needs further clarification. The proposed pad elevations and finished floor elevations are hardly changing. Therefore, why is there now a problem with meeting the invert elevation to the existing sewer line in Pacific Avenue? Additionally, the correspondence indicates that,". . . future phases to the campus would necessitate the proposed sewer lateral." Generally, separate buildings have their own sewer laterals, or tie into an on-site "sewer main," which ties into the public system. Is this "lateral" supposed to serve as a type of "main" for future buildings? If so, this fon^/ard thinking is commendable, however, quantifiable data must be supplied of how this is going to operate, if indeed, the inlet elevations do not work as proposed. Basically, there is no need to cut into the street to install a new lateral (since the street is not being improved at this time) if the existing lateral can be utilized. 2. Thank you for showing a Double Detector Check Valve (DDCV) assembly for the fire-flow line. The water information still needs to be revised, however. Please show a 2" potable water service per CMWD Standard W-4. Also, label the DDCV as CMWD Standard W- 22. Please add a 4" valve at the fire service tap in Pacific Avenue. Finally, proposed wateriines, within the public right of way, must be copper in accordance with CMWD Standards. (Please see the redline check prints for more information.) 3. Thank you for labeling the existing sewer and wateriine in Pacific Avenue on sheet 4. As previously requested, also please indicate that this information is from DWG 133-6, on sheet 4. Gradina & Drainaae 1. Thank you for providing the correspondence form Kleinfelder regarding Preliminary Geo- technical Study, Section 3.2, (existing slope surficial stability issue). The correspondence indicates that mitigation measure No. 1, "erosion mats," will be utilized to stabilize this slope. Staff has some concern over this issue, as follows: a. This slope is located "off-site" from the proposed project. Therefore, provide documentation from the effected property owner (North County Transit District?) that they concur with the proposed design; b. Please be advised, that prior to issuance of any grading permit, an easement must be secured from the effected property owner to work on this slope; c. What effect will the proposed parking lot redesign (i.e., retention basin, parking spaces and drive aisles), per above, have on this existing slope if the proposed setback from the slope is deceased from its proposed 13'? Will the proposed "erosion mat" still suffice? Please provide additional information from the soils engineer regarding this issue. Miscellaneous 1. Previously the existing dwelling units along Pacific Avenue and Mountain View Drive were shown on the civil plan sheet 4, in accordance with a previous request; now they have been deleted. Please add them back to civil plan sheet 4. RP 99-14, CDP 99-49: ARM^IAVY ACADEMY (ANA) 1999 SECOND ISSUES REVIEW L. ROSENSTEIN MEMO; DECEMBER 6, 2000 2. Thank you for showing the sight distance sight lines on all of the applicable plan sheets. Landscape plan sheet 5, however, needs to be revised. The sight line must be clear. Therefore, either remove all of the proposed trees that encroach into the sight line, or, place the following notes on sheet 5: "No structure, fence, wall, tree, shrub, sign, or other object over 30 inches above the street level, nor having a canopy less than 8 feet above the street level, may be placed or permitted to encroach within the area identified as a sight distance corridor in accordance with City Standard Public Street-Design Criteria, Section 8.B.3. The underlying property owner shall maintain this condition." "The limits of these sight distance corridors shall be reflected on any improvement, grading, or landscape plan prepared in association with this development." Also, please revise the planting legend so that the above first note will work, if it is used. 3. As before, staff had hoped to be able to draft the Engineering Conditions of Approval for the project at this time. However, not all issues were addressed, and, with the additional information that was provided, other new issues surfaced. Even though the project seems to have been in review for quite some time, the formal first issue review was not conducted until all of the requisite information was submitted; that review was not until August 28, 2000. Again, staff will work with the applicant; however, all issues must be resolved. A redlined check print is attached for the applicant's use in making the requested revisions. This redlined check print must be returned with the revised plans to facilitate continued staff review. If you or anyone from ANA have any questions, please contact me directly at 760/602-2747. MICHAEL J. Associate Engineer - Engineering/Development Services Attachment Cc: Senior Civil Engineer - Engineering/Development Services Associate Planner - M. Grim REDEVELOPMENT PERMIT REVIEW AND COMMENT REOUEST Date: November 22, 2000 Planning Department - M. GRIM Water District V Engineering Department - M. SHIREY Landscape Plancheck Consultant -L. BLACK Police Department School District V Building Department - P. KELLEY North County Transit District City Attorney V Fire Department - M. SMITH To Departments: Subject: RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 The attached plans and corresponding documents have been resubmitted by the Army and Navy Academy for property located at 2585 Carlsbad Blvd. Please review the enclosed information and forward your comments on application completeness and issues of concem to my office by December 6,2000. Thank you for your assistance. Project Title: Permit No.: Applicant: Army & Navy Academy (ANA) Dormitories RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 Army & Navy Academy Brief Description of Proposal: The applicant has reduced the scope of the project to include a two-story (35 foot high), 80-bed dormitory on the south side of Pacific Avenue and a 48-space parking lot on the northwesterly comer of Mountain View Drive and Carlsbad Blvd. Assigned staff member: Lori Rosenstein (Redevelopment) & Mike Grim (Planning) Comments: Please e-mail all comments to Lori Rosenstein in Housing & Redevelopment. Lori Rosenstein - ANA ^ Page 1 From: Mike Shirey To: Lori Rosenstein Date: 12/6/00 2:08PM Subject: ANA Lori, Attached is my 4th Check (2nd Issues Review) of ANA. Biggest issue is the parking lot. Their dimensions do not meet standards. They need 24' drive aisles and 20' stalls. Plus, the detention basin is undersized which could change the design of the parking lot. I have forwarded you a "hard" copy of my issues memo with my redlined check prints. (By the way, the other redlines were mailed to me last week, and I just got them.) Please forward my issues and check print to Robert Morales. Finally, I still need to think about the phasing stuff, but that doesn't really effect the project regarding "issues." So, I'll tackle that when I condition the project. Any questions, e-mail or call (x2747) -Mike S. January 31, 2001 TO: MANAGEMENT ANALYST -^nn.^.ur -NT FROM: Senior Planner RP 99-14 - ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY DORMITORY RECONSTRUCTION Thanks again for the nneeting last Monday, it was very helpful to go over the project in such focused detail. Listed below are the Planning Departnnent comments on the latest submittal. 1. The original master plan parking arrangement was based upon a maximum of 350 students and 100 employees. The amount of required parking was assessed per the Zoning Ordinance standard for high schools: one space per employee and one space per ten students. Since the existing parking totalled only 25 spaces and many of the students lived on campus without cars, etc., the master plan was conditioned to only add part of the total parking requirement concurrent with the first phase of development. According to Exhibit G of RP 94-02, this amounted to 48 additional spaces. I would recommend that these spaces be built in concurrence with the proposed dormitory. Since the original permit allowed partial construction of the parking, we would just be continuing an existing agreement. Regarding the remaining parking, I would condition all parking to be up to code with the next remodel/construction project they perform. Again, this is based upon a maximum of 350 students and 100 employees; any changes to those numbers would result in a reevaluation of parking requirements. The parking data should be shown on the summary data sheet. 2. They seem to be adding a significant number of beds with this proposal. Army & Navy should provide us with a disposition of the existing and proposed beds with regard to the number of students and faculty. It seems like they're increasing capacity of the school without declaring additional students. This would include a clarification of the amount of demolition of Hoover and McClendon Halls. RP 99-14 - ARMY AND l^Y ACADEMY DORMITORY RECONDUCTION January 31, 2001 Page 2 3. All parking spaces (existing and proposed) should be numbered for ease of identification and reference. For instance, it appears that there are only 24 existing spaces on the site plan. 4. According to the Building Department, the proposed three-foot building separation conforms to the Uniform Building Code if the existing building has no external openings along that area. This is an advisory note for the applicant; depending on the floor plan of the existing dormitory, they may need to delete rooms to accommodate the three-foot building separation. Thanks again for the meeting and please feel free to contact me at extension 4623 if you have any questions. MICHAEL GRIM Chris DeCerbo Michael Shirey Planning File Copy REDEVELOPMENT PERMIT REVIEW AND COMMENT REOUEST Date: December 22, 2000 Planning Department - M. GRIM Water District V Engineermg Department - M. SHIREY Landscape Plancheck Consultant Police Department School District Building Department North County Transit District City Attorney Fire Department To Departments: Subject: RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 The attached plans and corresponding documents have been resubmitted by the Army and Navy Academy for property located at 2585 Carisbad Blvd. Please review the enclosed information and forward your comments on issues of concern and/or project conditions to my office by Januaiy 5irl^000. \ Thank you for your assistance. Project Title: Permit No.: Applicant: Army & Navy Academy (ANA) Dormitories RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 Army & Navy Academy Brief Description of Proposal: The applicant has reduced the scope of the project to include a two-story (35 foot high), 80-bed dormitory on the south side of Pacific Avenue and a 48-space parking lot on the northwesteriy corner of Mountain View Drive and Carisbad Blvd. Assigned staff member: Lori Rosenstein (Redevelopment) & Mike Grim (Planning) Comments: Please e-mail all comments to Lori Rosenstein in Housing & Redevelopment. f PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING/DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MEMORANDUM RECEiVED January 31, 2001 TO: LORI ROSENSTEIN - HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT un.ilSfP'^CAeiiSBAO FROM: Associate Engineer - Engineering/Development Services FEB 01 2001 TYOFCABiilSBi REDEVELO DEPARTMENT RP 99-14, CDP 99-49: ARMY/NAVY ACADEMY (ANA) 1999 ~ MPA & DORMITORIES SECOND ISSUES REVIEW Engineering Department staff have completed a fifth review (third actual issues review) of the above-referenced project. Prior to engineering staff making a determination on the project, the following engineering issues of concern must be resolved/adequately addressed: Traffic & Transportation 1. As previously requested, please revise the "future" curb to curb and right of way widths for Mountain View Drive to 20'/30', respectively. This is not a cul-de-sac street, and therefore, must meet Local Street Standards. Additional public right of way dedication will be required. Also, revise the Civil, Architectural and Landscape plan view widths/design to meet Local Street Standards. Sewer <S Water 1. The sewer design is exactly the same. Staff had previously asked for clarification regarding this design (i.e., the need for a new sewer lateral). If the plan is to still install an on-site sewer main to service future buildings, then, as previously indicated, a different design is required. Also as previously indicated, there may be no need to cut into the street to install a new lateral (since the street is not being improved at this time) if the existing lateral can be utilized. This issue still needs to be addressed. (Please see Sewer & Water, Issue No. 1, of Engineering Second Issues Review memorandum, dated December 6, 2000.) 2. Thank you for revising the proposed potable water and fire services. However, staffs detailed directions were not followed, so additional revisions are required, as follows: a. First, are you sure that two (2) 4" lines are required? b. As previously requested, please show a 2" potable water service per Carisbad Municipal W^ter District (CMWD) Standard W-4. c. As previously requested, label the Double Detector Check Valve (DDCV) assembly for the fire-flow line as a W-22 (there is no W-28). Also, locate the DDCV out of the public right of way. d. A Backflow Preventor has been added to the potable wateriine, please move this out of the public right of way. 3. Again, as previously requested, please indicate that the existing improvement information for Pacific Avenue is from DWG 133-6, on sheet C-4. RP 99-14, CDP 99-49: ARMY/NI^ ACADEMY (ANA) 1999 THIRD ISSUES REVIEW L. ROSENSTEIN MEMO; JANUARY 31, 2001 Gradina & Drainaae 1. As previously requested, please provide documentation from the effected property owner (North County Transit District?), that they concur with the proposed "slope stabilization mitigation measures," for the proposed parking lot construction. 2. Thank you for providing surface runoff calculations using information contained in the San Diego Hydrology Manual. The report, as prepared, is acceptable. However, staff does have the following comments: a. Staff had previously asked for a basin cross-section on the redlined check prints. This cross-section was not added to the plans (sheet C-4). Staff needs to see this section because there is some concern with how this basin is actually going to function since the street improvements will not be completed at this time. Therefore, the section should show how the Mountain View drive outfall will function with the existing street grades, curbs (proposed outfall seems to be located behind an existing curb), and edge of pavement (EP). b. Relocate the proposed slopes of the basin over 2' for the additional right of way dedication requirement, and make sure that the basin still has the same capacity. Miscellaneous 1. Again, thank you for showing the sight distance sight lines on all of the applicable plan sheets, and, for adding the previously requested note on the Preliminary Landscape plan (LS). (Please see Miscellaneous, Issue No. 2, of Engineering Second Issues Review memorandum, dated December 6, 2000.) However, LS sheet 5, still needs to be revised, or staff's previous comment must be addressed. The sight line must be clear. The note that was added only functions if the proposed trees and vegetation have a canopy of not less than 8', and, not greater than 30", respectively. The planting legend was not revised, and no explanation was given, if this proposed landscaping meets the 8'/30" criteria. Therefore, a) provide documentation that this proposed planting schedule meets this criteria; b) revise the planting schedule, so that it does meet this criteria; or, c) remove all vegetation from encroaching into the site line. Additionally, as previously requested, please add the second half of the note to the LS, as follows: "The limits of these sight distance corridors shall be reflected on any improvement, grading, or landscape plan prepared in association with this development." 2. As before, staff had hoped to be able to draft the Engineering Conditions of Approval for the project at this time. However, again, not all issues were addressed. Staff will continue to work with the applicant; however, all issues must be adequately resolved. 3. Previous redlined check prints are attached for the applicant's use in making the requested revisions. These check prints must be returned with the revised plans to facilitate continued staff review. If you or anyone from ANA have any questions, please contact me directly at 760/602-2747. MICHAEL J. Associate Engineer - Er^gineering/Development Services Attachment Cc: Senior Civil Engineer - Engineering/Development Services Senior Planner - M. Grim REDEVELOPMENT PERMIT REVIEW AND COMMENT REQUEST Date: February 26, 2001 V Planning Department - M. GRIM Water District Engineering Department - M. SHIREY Landscape Plancheck Consultant -L. BLACK Police Department School District Building Department North County Transit District City Attorney Fire Department To Departments: Subject: RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 The attached plans and corresponding documents have been resubmitted by the Army and Navy Academy for property located at 2585 Carisbad Blvd. Please review the enclosed information and forward your comments on issues of concern and/or project conditions to my office by March 12, 2001. Thank you for your assistance. Project Title: Permit No.: Applicant: Army & Navy Academy (ANA) Dormitories RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 Army & Navy Academy Brief Description of Proposal: Two-story (35 foot high), 80-bed dormitory on the south side of Pacific Avenue and a 40-space parking lot on the northwesterly corner of Mountain View Drive and Carisbad Blvd. Assigned staff member: Lori Rosenstein (Redevelopment) & Mike Grim (Planning) Comments: Please e-mail all comments to Lori Rosenstein in Housing & Redevelopment. REDEVELOPMENT PERMIT REVIEW AND COMMENT REOUEST Date: March 22, 2001 V Planning Department - M. GRIM Water District V Engineering Department - M. SHIREY Landscape Plancheck Consultant Police Department School District Building Department - P. KELLEY North County Transit District City Attorney Fire Department - M. SMITH To Departments: Subject: RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 The attached plans have been resubmitted by the Army and Navy Academy for property located at 2585 Carisbad Blvd. The plans should be in final format to warrant the establishment of final project conditions. Please review the plans and foHA/ard all project conditions to my office by April 5, 2001. Thank you for your assistance. Project Title: Permit No.: Applicant: Army & Navy Academy (ANA) Dormitories RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 Army & Navy Academy Brief Description of Proposal: Two-story (35 foot high), 80-bed dormitory on the south side of Pacific Avenue and a 40-space parking lot on the northwesterly corner of Mountain View Drive and Carisbad Blvd. Assigned staff member: Lori Rosenstein (Redevelopment) & Mike Grim (Planning) Comments: Please e-mail all conditions to Lori Rosenstein in Housing & Redevelopment From: Mike Grim To: Lori Rosenstein Subject: ANA resubmittal - RP 99-14 Lori: I've reviewed the ANA resubmittal, dated 2/20/01. It looks like they actually responded to virtually all of my comments!! (will wonders never cease?). It appears that the number of beds is called out in detail, they eliminated the phasing plan, they added parking (although a couple of the spaces look a little small but there's plenty of room to fix that), they addressed the flat roof issue and others...WOW! I'll be in your neighborhood some time today so I can drop my red-lined checkprints off then. I think we should condition the project so that the demolition/remodel of the existing buildings to reduce the number of beds/rooms is done concurrent with the new dorm construction and that no final occupancy is given to the new dorm building until those other beds/rooms are completely removed. Thanks, Mike REDEVELOPMENT PERMIT REVIEW AND COMMENT REOUEST Date: March 22, 2001 V Planning Department - M. GRIM Water District V Engineering Department - M. SHIREY Landscape Plancheck Consultant Police Department School District V Building Department - P. KELLEY North County Transit District City Attorney Fire Department - M. SMITH To Departments: Subject: RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 The attached plans have been resubmitted by the Army and Navy Academy for property located at 2585 Carisbad Blvd. The plans should be in final format to warrant the establishment of final project conditions. Please review the plans and fonA/ard all project conditions to my office by April 5, 2001. Thank you for your assistance. Project Title: Permit No.: Applicant: Army & Navy Academy (ANA) Dormitories RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 Army & Navy Academy Brief Description of Proposal: Two-story (35 foot high), 80-bed dormitory on the south side of Pacific Avenue and a 40-space parking lot on the northwesterly corner of Mountain View Drive and Carisbad Blvd. Assigned staff member: Lori Rosenstein (Redevelopment) & Mike Grim (Planning) Comments: Please e-mail all conditions to Lori Rosenstein in Housing & Redevelopment 2> ^-3^ REDEVELOPMENT PERMIT REVIEW AND COMMENT REOUEST Date: April 3, 2001 Planning Department - M. GRIM Water District Engineering Department - M. SHIREY Landscape Plancheck Consultant - L. BLACK Police Department School District Building Department North County Transit District City Attorney Fire Department To Departments: Subject: RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 The attached plans have been resubmitted by the Army and Navy Academy for property located at 2585 Carisbad Blvd. The plans should be in final format to warrant the establishment of final project conditions. Please review the plans and let me know if it results in any change in conditions. Thank you for your assistance. Project Title: Permit No.: Applicant: Army & Navy Academy (ANA) Dormitories RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 Army & Navy Academy Brief Description of Proposal: Two-story (35 foot high), 80-bed dormitory on the south side of Pacific Avenue and a 40-space parking lot on the northwesterly corner of Mountain View Drive and Carisbad Blvd. Assigned staff member: Lori Rosenstein (Redevelopment) & Mike Grim (Planning) Comments: Please e-mail all conditions to Lori Rosenstein in Housing & Redevelopment REDEVELOPMENT PERMIT AQ REVIEW AND COMMENT REOUES Date: April 3, 2001 V Planning Department - M. GRIM Engineering Department - M. SHIREY Police Department Building Department City Attorney Water Dis Landscape Plane -L. BLACK sultant School District North County Transit District Fire Department To Departments: Subject: RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 The attached plans have been resubmitted by the Army and Navy Academy for property located at 2585 Carisbad Blvd. The plans should be in final format to warrant the establishment of final project conditions. Please review the plans and let me know if it results in any change in conditions. / i Thank you for your assistance. A/^^ ^hn)y^^^^ C^Y^in^A^ Project Title: Permit No.: Applicant: Army & Navy Academy (ANA) Dormitories RP 99-14/GDP 99-49 Army & Navy Academy Brief Description of Proposal: Two-story (35 foot high), 80-bed dormitory on the south side of Pacific Avenue and a 40-space parking lot on the northwesteriy corner of Mountain View Drive and Carisbad Blvd. Assigned staff member: Lori Rosenstein (Redevelopment) & Mike Grim (Planning) Comments: Please e-mail all conditions to Lori Rosenstein in Housing & Redevelopment ^3 ^ 31 Q^d^'-'^ee^ Of^^f^. 1^^t;3| Proiects exceeding the Growth Control Point - Section 21.90.045): Note: All three findings must be made. 17. That the project will provide sufficient additional public facilities for the density in excess of the control point to ensure that the adequacy of the City's public facility plans will not be adversely impacted, in that [Click Here] . 18. That there have been sufficient developments approved in the quadrant at densities below the control point to offset the units in the project above the control point so that approval will not result in exceeding the quadrant limit. 19. That all necessary pubhc faciHties required by the Growth Management Ordinance will be constmcted or are guaranteed to be constructed concurrently with the need for them created by this project and in compliance with adopted City standards, in that [CUck Here] . COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN FOR McCLELLAN-PALOMAR AIRPORT (GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT - SPECIAL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS - AIRPORT) (Optional fmding if applicable) 20. The project is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) for the McClellan-Palomar Airport, dated April 1994, in that [CUck Here] (i.e., as conditioned the applicant shall record a notice conceming aircrafl noise, or; the applicant shall record an avigation easement). The project is compatible with the projected noise levels ofthe CLUP; and, based on the noise/land use compatibility matrix of the CLUP, the proposed land use is compatible with the airport, in that [Click Here] . LANDSCAPING CONSISTENCY - (SECTION 14.28.020) 21. That the project is consistent with the City's Landscape Manual (Carlsbad Mimicipal Code Section 14.28.020 and Landscape Manual Section IB). III. REQUIRED DISCRETIONARY PERMIT FINDINGS: ADULT ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT - (SECTION 21.43.080) 22. That the proposed use will not be contrary to the public interest, in that [Click Here] 23. That the proposed use will not be injurious to nearby properties, in that [Click Here] . 24. That the proposed use will not encourage the development of an adult entertainment area, in that [Click Here] . Rev 07/31/00 be submitted to the PUming Director no later than 60 days primb the request to final the map. The recorded Affordable Housing Agreement shall be binding on all future owners and successors in interest. 18. The Developer shall constmct the required inclusionary units concurrent with the project's market rate units, unless both the final decision making authority of the City and the Developer agree within an Affordable Housing Agreement to an altemate schedule for development. 19. At issuance of building permits, or prior to the approval of a final map and/or issuance of certificate of compliance for the conversion of existing apartments to air-space condominiums, the Developer shall pay to the City an inclusionary housing (in- lieu/impact) fee as an individual fee on a per market rate dwelling unit basis in the amount in effect at the time, as established by City Council Resolution from time to time. Housing (Non-Residential) 20. The Developer is aware that the City is preparing a non-residential housing impact fee (linkage fee) consistent with Program 4.1 of the Housing Element. The appHcant is further aware that the City may determine that certain non-residential projects may have to pay a linkage fee, in order to be foimd consistent with the Housing Element of the General Plan. If a linkage fee is established by City Coimcil ordinance and/or resolution and this project becomes subject to a linkage fee pursuant to said ordinance and/or resolution, then the Developer, or his/her/their successor(s) in interest shall pay the linkage fee. The linkage fee shall be paid at the time of issuance of building permits, except for projects involving a request for a non-residential planned development for an existing development, in which case, the fee shall be paid on approval of the final map, parcel map or certificate of compliance, required to process the non-residential PUD, whichever pertains. If linkage fees are required for this project, and they are not paid, this project will not be consistent with the General Plan and approval for this project will become null and void. Landscape 21. The Developer shall submit and obtain Planning Director approval of a Final Landscape and Irrigation Plan showing conformance with the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan and the City's Landscape Manual. The Developer shall constmct and install all landscaping as shown on the approved Final Plans, and maintain all landscaping in a healthy and thriving condition, fi-ee from weeds, trash, and debris. 22. The first submittal of Final Landscape and Irrigation Plans shall be pursuant to the landscape plan check process on file in the Planning Department and accompanied by the project's building, improvement, and grading plans. 23. The Developer shall submit and obtain Plarming Director approval of a Tree Preservation Plan showing existing onsite trees to be preserved, prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Existing onsite trees shall be retained wherever possible and shall be trimmed as needed. The Planning Director may approve the removal of trees, including but not limited to dead, decaying or potentially dangerous trees during the review of the Tree 24 Rev 07/31/00 B) When a Code RemindSR applicable to a specific project or peSR, it should be placed at the end of ALL CONDITIONS of the resolution in a separate section entitled "Code Reminders." To further qualify the Code Reminder section of the resolution, a note should be added stating that: "The project is subject to all applicable provisions of local ordinances, including but not limited to the following code requirements: Fees The Developer shall pay park-in-lieu fees to the City, prior to the approval of the final map as required by Chapter 20.44 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Developer shall pay the citywide Public Facilities Fee imposed by City Council Policy #17, the License Tax on new constmction imposed by Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 5.09.030, and CFD #1 special tax (if applicable), subject to any credits authorized by Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 5.09.040. Developer shall also pay any applicable Local Facilities Management Plan fee for Zone [Click Here], pursuant to Chapter 21.90. All such taxes/fees shall be paid at issuance of building permit. If the taxes/fees are not paid, this approval will not be consistent with the General Plan and shall become void. The Developer shall pay a landscape plan check and inspection fee as required by Section 20.08.050 ofthe Carisbad Municipal Code. Final Map Notes The Developer shall provide the following note on the final map of the subdivision and final mylar of this development submitted to the City: A. "Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code established a Growth Management Control Point for each General Plan land use designation. Development cannot exceed the Growth Control Point except as provided by Chapter 21.90. The land use designation for this development is [Click Here] dwelling units per non-constrained acre. Parcels [Click Here] were used to calculate the intensity of development under the General Plan and Chapter 21.90. Subsequent redevelopment or resubdivision of any one of these parcels must also include parcels [Click Here] under the General Plan and Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code." B. Code Reminder # [Click Here] C. Etc. [Specific language or cross reference to specific Code Reminder.] General The Developer shall give all notices of the condominium conversion to all tenants as required by the Subdivision Map Act and the Carlsbad Municipal Code. 31 Rev 07/31/00 Lori. Rosenstein - Army & Navy Dormitories RP99-14/CDP99-49 # Page 1 From: To: Date: Subject: Lori, Matt Ernau Rosenstein, Lori 2/8/01 3:55PM Army & Navy Dormitories RP99-14/CDP99-49 Underground fire line is shown on page 4 as four inches in diameter. Underground subject to fire sprinkler system calculations to verify size. Fire alarm required per CFC article 10. If you have any question please call 4663 CC: Smith, Mike Lori. Rosenstein - RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 ^ ^ Pagel From: Pat Kelley To: Lori Rosenstein Date: 3/26/01 10:37AM Subject: RP 99-14 / CDP 99-49 No critical comments here Lori - The plans are very choopy still, and it looks like the applicant needs to pay some attention to the roofs where they have called out fire rated wall assemblies. The overhangs cannot project beyond those walls w/o special treatment and the roof itself needs attention when there's no parapet, but that kind of stuff can be addressed in building plan check. I'll send the plans back via interoffice snail mail Pat Lori Rosens.tein - ANA conditions, etc. Page 1 From: To: Date: Subject: Lori: Mike Grim Lori Rosenstein 3/27/01 8:49AM ANA conditions, etc. Attached are some possible conditions for the ANA project. I took a stab at a couple custom conditions regarding the phasing of the other dormitory/hall demolitions and the proposed parking relative to the completion of the new dorm. Please feel free to revise these conditions to your liking. If I've missed anything, please feel free to contact me. Thanks - it looks like the light at the end of the tunnel is no longer the headlight of an oncoming train...this might actually go the hearing!!!!! See ya, Mike Lori Rosenstein - RP9914.conditions.doc ^ Pagel POTENTIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RP 99-14 RESOLUTION - ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY STANDARD CONDmONS: Note: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to issuance of building permits or grading permits, whichever occurs first. 1. If any of the following conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their terms, to be implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issuance of all future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of occupancy issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. No vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City's approval of this Redevelopment Pemiit. 2. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections and modifications to the Redevelopment Permit documents, as necessary to make them intemally consistent and in conformity with the final action on the project. Development shall occur substantially as shown on the approved Exhibits. Any proposed development different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval. 3. The Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local laws and regulations in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 4. If any condition for construction of any public improvements or facilities, or the payment of any fees in-lieu thereof, imposed by this approval or imposed by law on this Project are challenged, this approval shall be suspended as provided in Govemment Code Section 66020. If any such condition is determined to be invalid this approval shall be invalid unless the City Council determines that the project without the condition complies with all requirements of law. 5. The Developer/Operator shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless the City of Carlsbad, its Council members, officers, employees, agents, and representatives, from and against any and all Habilities, losses, damages, demands, claims and costs, including court costs and attomey's fees incurred by the City arising, directiy or indirectly, from (a) City's approval and issuance of this Redevelopment Permit, (b) City's approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether discretionary or non-discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein, and (c) Developer/Operator's installation and operation of the facility permitted hereby, including without limitation, any and all liabilities arising from the emission by the facility of electromagnetic fields or Lori.Rosenstein-RP9914.conditions.doc ^ Page 2 other energy waves or emissions. This obligation survives until all legal proceedings have been concluded and continues even if the City's approval is not validated. 6. The Developer shall submit to Plamiing Department a reproducible 24" x 36", mylar copy of the Site Plan reflecting the conditions approved by the final decision making body. 7. The Developer shall include, as part of the plans submitted for any permit plan check, a reduced legible version of all approving resolution(s) in a 24" x 36" blueline drawing format. 12. Prior to the issuance of a building pennit, the Developer shall provide proof to the Director from the Carlsbad School District that this project has satisfied its obligation to provide school facilities. 9. This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation measures which are required as part of the Zone 1 Local Facilities Management Plan and any amendments made to that Plan prior to the issuance of building permits. 10. This approval is granted subject to the approval of CDP 99-49 and is subject to all conditions contained in Design Review Board Resolution No. ???? for that other approval. Building permits will not be issued for this project unless the local agency providing water and sewer services to the project provides written certification to the City that adequate water service and sewer facilities, respectively, are available to the project at the time of the application for the building permit, and that water and sewer capacity and facilities will continue to be available until the time of occupancy. 14. If a grading permit is required, all grading activities shall be planned in units that can be completed by October 1st. Grading activities shall be limited to the "dry season", April 1st to October 1st of each year. Grading activities may be extended to November 15th upon written approval of the City Engineer and only if all erosion control measures are in place by October 1st. 15. The Developer shall subinit and obtain Planning Director approval of a Final Landscape and Irrigation Plan showing conformance with the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan and the City's Landscape Manual. The Developer shall constmct and install all landscaping as shown on the approved Final Plans, and maintain all landscaping in a healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds, trash, and debris. 16. The first submittal of Final Landscape and Irrigation Plans shall be pursuant to the LorJ Rosenstein - RP9914.conditions.doc Page 3 •# — landscape plan check process on file in the Planning Department and accompanied by the project's building, improvement, and grading plans. 17. Prior to the issuance of the grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, Developer shall submit to the City a Notice of Restriction to be filed in the office of the County Recorder, subject to the satisfaction of the Planning Director, notifying all interested parties and successors in interest that the City of Carlsbad has issued a Redevelopment Permit and Coastal Development Permit by Resolutions No. [Click Here] on the real property owned by the Developer. Said Notice of Restriction shall note the property description, location of the file containing complete project details and all conditions of approval as well as any conditions or restrictions specified for inclusion in the Notice of Restriction. The Planning Director has the authority to execute and record an amendment to the notice which modifies or terminates said notice upon a showing of good cause by the Developer or successor in interest. CUSTOM CONDmONS: • The demolition and remodeling of the existing dormitories and halls is necessary to maintain the maximum 334-bed count. No Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed new 80-bed dormitory building shall be issued unless all necessary improvements and demolitions to the existing dormitories and halls have been completed, to the satisfaction of the Housing and Redevelopment Director. • AH proposed parking, as shown on Exhibits "A" - "C", dated [Click Here], shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Housing and Redevelopment Director prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed 80-bed dormitory. Lori Rosenstein - ANA - forgot enviro stuff Page 1 From: To: Date: Subject: Hi: Mike Grim Lori Rosenstein 3/27/01 8:57AM ANA - forgot enviro stuff By the way, the ANA project would be exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15302 of the State CEQA Guidelines - Replacement or Reconstruction of an pre-existing structure on the same site. Thanks, Mike CITY OF CARLSBAD DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING/DEVELOPMENT SERVICES RECEIVED March 27. 2001 ^pj^ ^r. ^ CITY OF CARLSBAD.^„ TO: LORI ROSENSTEIN FROM: Associate Engineer - Engineering/Development Services VIA: Senior Civil Engineer - Engineering/Development Services _ RP 99-14, CDP 99-49: ARMY/NAVY ACADEMY DORMITORY RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT REPORT AND CONDITIONS TRANSMITTAL Engineering Department staff have completed a review of the above-referenced project and are recommending: X That the project be approved subject to the conditions as listed on the attached sheet. That the project be denied for the following reasons: X The following is a final Engineering/Development Services project report for inclusion in the staff report for this project. EN^^EERING/DEVELOPMENT S^^ES PROJECT REPORT PROJECTID: RP 99-14, CDP 99-49 PREPAREDBY: Michael J. Shirey PROJECT NAME: Army/Navy Academy APPROVED BY: SZ/ Dormitory Reconstruction LOCATION: South side of Pacific Avenue, between Ocean Street and Mountain View Drive BRIEF DESCRIPTION: Reconstruct existing dormitory after fire. ENGINEERING ISSUES AND DISCUSSION: Traffic and Circulation: Projected Average Daily Traffic (ADT): 1400 (for entire site); which include, 450 (for dormitory) Traffic Study Performed by: N/A Comment: There are no major traffic or circulations issues associated with the proposed project. Sewer: Sewer District: Carisbad Sewer Equivalent Dwelling Units (edu's) Required: Dormitory - Utilizing High School criteria of 1 edu/30 pupils: 80 pupils X 1 edu/30 pupils = 2.70 Total EDU's = 3.00 Entire Site - Utilizing High School criteria of 1 edu/30 pupils, and Faculty Housing criteria of 1 edu/unit: 304 pupils X 1 edu/30 pupils =10.13 + 7 units X 1 edu/unit = 7.00 Total EDU's =17.13 Total EDU's =17.00 Comment: The project civil and sewer design engineer have both determined that the existing 6" VCP sewer lateral for the dormitory must be replaced due to its age and its potential for failure at the connection points with the existing sewer mainline within Pacific Avenue. Therefore, this existing 6" VCP lateral will be replaced with a new 6" PVC lateral. Water: ^0 •# Water District: Carisbad EDU's Required: Dormitory 3/Entire Site 17 Gallons Per Day (gpd) Required: Dormitory - 3edu's x 220gpd/edu = 660gpd Entire Site - 17edu's x 220gpd/edu = 3740gpd Comment: There are no major water issues associated with the proposed project. Grading: Quantities: Cut = 1400 cy; Fill = 1900 cy; Import 500cy; Export = Ocy (See comment below.) Permit Required: YES Off-site Approval required/obtained: YES/YES Hillside Grading Requirements met: N/A Preliminary Geo-technical Investigation Performed by: Kleinfelder, Inc. Comment: Off-site slope stability mitigation is required for the proposed parking lot slopes, within the North County Transit District (NCTD) right of way. NCTD has submitted documentation that they are aware of and concur with the proposed grading and mitigation. In accordance with the documentation that NCTD submitted, the grading contractor will be required to obtain a "Right of Entry" permit from NCTD prior to any grading within their right of way. Drainage and Erosion Control: Drainage Basin: A Preliminary Hydrology Study Performed by: DCI Engineering, Inc. Erosion Potential: High (On proposed parking lot slopes within the NCTD right of way.) Comment: A 3' deep private retention basin shall be installed adjacent to the proposed parking lot. This basin will reduce the post-developed 10-Year, 6-Hour storm to pre-developed conditions, in accordance with California Coastal Commission Mello II criteria. This basin will also function as a structural pollutant mitigation device in accordance with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES), and San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (SDRWQCB) criteria. Land Title: Conflicts with existing easement: YES (See comment below.) Easement dedication required: NO Site boundary coincides with land title: YES Comment: A number of older easements and street dedications ("paper streets"), that are no longer in use, traverse the site. Construction ofthe dormitory and parking lot will not effect any existing easements. Improvements: Off-site improvements: NO Standard Variance Required: NO Comment: Previously, in accordance with Design Review Board (DRB) Resolution No. 233, approved on October 4,1995, construction phasing conditions of approval were placed on Redevelopment Permit (RP) 94-02. These phasing conditions were placed on the project to construct full street improvements when any future Redevelopment Permits within the ANA Master Plan were submitted. The current application is for the reconstruction of one of the ANA dormitories which was severely damaged by fire. To meet City parking requirements, a parking lot must also be constructed. Generally, with discretionary review of a project, exactions are made on the developer/applicant to complete street/infrastructure frontage improvements concurrent with development. Thus, the previous construction phasing condition. Since approval of DRB Resolution No. 233, the City enacted an Alternative Street Design ordinance, NS-555/556, on June 27, 2000, which designates certain streets as alternative design streets. Alternative design streets are either to be constructed concurrent with adjacent development, or, deferred in accordance with a Neighborhood Improvement Agreement (NIA). The two streets adjacent to this proposed project are: Pacific Avenue and Mountain View Drive. Both of these streets are designated as alternative design streets. Since this proposed project is a reconstruction of a damaged building, rather than additional development ofthe property, rather than improving these two streets at this time, a NIA will be executed by ANA, so as to secure improvements to these streets in the future, once an alternative design is prepared. Condition of Approval No. 10, of DRB Resolution No. 233, is still applicable to the ANA Master Plan and is still valid and in full force and effect, however, the condition will be held in abeyance until such time as the ANA submits for an actual Master Plan Amendment (MPA). Once a MPA is submitted, the phasing condition shall once again become operative, and improvements shall be completed, in accordance with the phasing plan, the NIA, and, alternative street design criteria. ^iJ^NAVY ACADEMY - DORMITO^^ RP 99-14, CDP 99-49: ARMT7NAVY ACADEMY - DORMITORYRECONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ENGINEERING CONDITIONS NOTE: Unless specifically stated in the condition, all ofthe following conditions, upon the approval ofthis proposed Redevelopment Permit, must be met priorto approval of a grading permit. Genera/ 1. (7) Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from any proposed construction site within this project, Developer shall apply for, and obtain approval from the City Engineer, a construction staging plan and proposed haul route. 2. (16) Developer shall install sight distance corridors as shown on the Redevelopment Permit Architectural, Civil, and, preliminary Landscape site plans; and, in accordance with Engineering Standards. Fees/Agreements 3. (17) Developer shall cause property owner to execute and submit to the City Engineer for recordation, the City's standard form Geologic Failure Hold Harmless Agreement. 4. (21) Prior to issuance of building permit. Developer shall cause property owner to enter into a Neighborhood Improvement Agreement with the City for the future pubiic improvement to Pacific Avenue and Mountain View Drive along the project frontage for a half street width of 42 feet (based on a half street of 30 feet, plus 12 feet). Public improvements shall include but are not limited to: Paving, Base, Sidewalks, Curbs and Gutters, Pavement Preparation, Clearing and Grubbing, Under-grounding or Relocation of Utilities, Sewer, Water, Fire Hydrant(s), Street Light Standard(s), and Driveway Approach, etc., to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Developer shall process a Plat and Legal Description (NIA Exhibit A'), and submit an improvement cost estimate (used to prepare NIA Calculation Sheet & NIA Exhibit 'C'), through the City's Engineering Department as a "PR Number." The NIA Calculation Sheet shall include, but not be limited to, all ofthe above-referenced improvements, Design, 20% Contingency, and Standard Assessment District, Plan Check and Inspection costs. Grading 5. (24) Developer shall submit to the City Engineer proof that a Notice of Intention forthe start of work has been submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board. 6. (26) This project requires off site grading. 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 ofthe 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 ofthis approval or modify the plans so grading will not occur outside the project and apply for and obtain a plan consistency determination from both the City Engineer and Planning Director. 7. (27) Based upon a review of the proposed grading and the grading quantities shown on the site 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. Coastal Conditions 8. (28) Since a Grading Permit is required, all grading activities shall be planned in units that can be completed by October 1st. Grading activities shall be limited to the "dry season", April 1st to October 1st of each year. Grading activities may be extended to November 15th upon written approval ofthe City Engineer, obtained in advance, and only if ali erosion control measures are in place by October 1st. Dedications/Improvements 9. (32) Additional drainage easements may be required. Developer shall dedicate and provide or install drainage structures, as may be required by the City Engineer, prior to or concurrent with any grading or building permit. 10. (37) Mountain View Drive shall be dedicated by Owner along the project frontage based on a center line to right-of-way width of 30 feet, including the curb return radius (35' radius) at the northwest corner ofthe Mountain View Drive/Carlsbad Boulevard intersection, and in conformance with City of Carisbad Standards. Additionally, the Owner shall also dedicate a 35 foot curb return radius at the southeast corner of the Pacific Avenue/Ocean Street intersection, in conformance with City ofCarisbad Standards. 11. (39) Developer shall have the entire drainage system designed, submitted to and approved by the City Engineer, to ensure that runoff resulting from 10-year frequency storms of 6 hours and 24 hours duration under developed conditions, are equal to or less than the runoff from a storm of the same frequency and duration under existing developed conditions. Both 6 hour and 24 hour storm durations shall be analyzed to determine the detention basin capacities necessary to accomplish the desired results. 12. (40) Developer shall complywith the City's requirements ofthe National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. Developer shall provide improvements constructed pursuant to best management practices as referenced in the "California 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 ofthe City Engineer. Said plans shall include but not be limited to notifying prospective owners and tenants ofthe 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. 13. The applicant shal^bmit for City approval, a "Storm Water pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)." The SWPPP shall be in compliance with current requirements and provisions established by the San Diego Region Water Quality Control Board. The SWPPP shall address measures to reduce to the maximum extent possible storm water pollutant runoff at both construction and post-construction phases ofthe project. At a minimum, the Plan shall: 1) Identify existing and post-development on-site pollutants; 2) Recommend source control Best Management Practices (BMPs) to filter said pollutants; 3) Establish specific procedures for handling spills and routine clean up. Special considerations and effort shall be applied to employee and resident education on the proper procedures for handling clean up and disposal of pollutants; 4) Ensure long-term maintenance of all post constructed BMPs in perpetuity; 5) Identify how post-development runoff rates and velocities from the site will not exceed the pre-development runoff rates and velocities for a 10-year, 6-hour storm event. Code Reminder The project is subject to all applicable provisions of local ordinances, including but not limited to the following: 14. (49) Developer shall exercise special care during the construction phase of this project to prevent off-site siltation. Planting and erosion control shall be provided in accordance with Carisbad Municipal Code Chapter 15.16 (the Grading Ordinance) to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Special Enciineerina Conditions 15. The 48' right of way dimension shown on the Mountain View drive typical street section, on sheet C-4 (Civil Site Plan), shall be revised to 50'. This revision shall be shown on the site plan conforming mylar. 16. Condition of Approval No. 10, of DRB Resolution No. 233, is still applicable to the ANA Master Plan and is still valid and in full force and effect; however, the condition will be held in abeyance until such time as the ANA submits for an actual Master Plan Amendment (MPA). Once a MPA is submitted, the phasing condition shall once again become operative, and improvements shall be completed, in accordance with the phasing plan, the NIA, and, alternative street design criteria. WATER & SEWER CONDITJONS 1. Prior to approval of improvement or grading plans. Developer shall meet with the Fire Marshal to determine if fire protection measures (fire flows, fire hydrant locations, building sprinklers) are required to serve the project. Fire hydrants, if proposed, shall be considered public improvements and shall be served by public water mains to the satisfaction of the Deputy City Engineer - Utilities. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits. Developer shall pay all fees, deposits, and charges for connection to public facilities; including, the San Diego Countv Water Authoritv capacity charge(s). 3. The Developer shall install potable water and fire service water services, and meters, at a location approved by the Deputy City Engineer - Utilities. The locations of said services shall be reflected on public improvement plan DWG 133-6, in accordance with a construction change to the plan. 4. The Developer shall install sewer lateral(s) and clean-out(s) at a location approved by the Deputy City Engineer - Utilities. The locations of the sewer lateral(s) shall be reflected on public improvement plan DWG 133-6, in accordance with a construction change to the plan. xi Rosenstein - Army/ Navy Academy pr dormitory Page 1 From: Martin Aguilera To: Lori Rosenstein Date: 4/18/01 9:38AM Subject: Army/ Navy Academy proposed dormitory 1. Fire Alarm required. 2. Confirm fire flow data 3.Confirm with Water Department configuration of back-flow detector check and fire department connections. Lori Rosenstein - Army & Navy Academy ^ Pagel From: Lori Rosenstein To: Debbie Fountain Subject: Army & Navy Academy Debbie: Here is an update of the status of Army & Navy Academy Dormitory. I spoke with Mike Shirey this morning and he shared with me the following: The applicant's representative submitted the final mylars yesterday. They have been fonA/arded to engineering consultant Doug Helming for final review. Mike has asked Doug to make the review a top priority. There are still two outstanding issues associated with the grading permit: 1) The project includes off-site grading and ANA needs the approval of the adjacent property owner, which I think is NCTD. Mike is going to see about removing this small area from the plans until approval of adjacent owner is granted. 2) ANA needs to submit a Storm Water Pollution Plan (SWPP). However, since the drainage basin within the proposed parking lot will collect much of the run-off Mike is going what he can do to make some concessions. Both of these solutions will require Bob W.'s approval before he will sign the final mylars. Mike doesn't expect the grading permit to be issued until next Wednesday or later. Hope this helps, Lori Transmittal Date: To: Attn: Proj: Proj No.: P.C. No.: From: cc: Signature: 06/05/01 City of Carisbad -Housing and Redevelopment Department 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B Carisbad, Ca 92008 Lori Rosenstein New Dormitory Building 99033.00 01-0285 Willis Fisher, tBP/Architecture V2^0 - X4M ^ File 6.6 Transmitting UJ • • Change Orders Prints Construction Docs Specifications I l| Copy of Letter • I Submittal I 11 Under Separate Cover I I I Shop Drawings Architecture Planning Interiors Mwagement Ol Samples I 11 Preliminary Drawings I 11 Diskettes • I other Qty (1) (1) (1) (1) Description Original sheet A-4 as approved by City of Carisbad Revised sheet A-4 Revised sheet A-4 with decorative fence and trees Cut sheet of "New Zealand Christmas Tree" • • • • For Your Use Approved as Corrected Approved Correct & Return For Approval Please Return • • • U.P.S. U.P.S. Overnight U.P.S. 2" Fed Ex Day I 11 O.C.B. Delivery I—11 tBP Deiivery Ol U.S. Mall • tBP/Architecture 2300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach. CA. 92663 ph: 949 673 0300 fax: 949 673 9267 • # Citv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department January 2, 2001 WILLIS FISHER TBP ARCHITECTURE 2300 NEWPORT BLVD NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 SUBJECT: ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY DORMITORY (RP99-14/CDP99-49) Following our meeting on the final conditions of the building permit for the Army & Navy Academy Dormitory, I reviewed the various color chips for the project with the Housing & Redevelopment Director for her input and approval. A decision was made to use the Glamour Gray (8520W) for the arched window insets on the north elevation of the building as depicted in the color elevation submitted to our department. It is our understanding that the remainder of the building will be Rain Shimmer white (CW002W). This should resolve the final issues of concern from the Housing & Redevelopment Department relative to the subject project. Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813 if you have any questions regarding the information contained in this letter. Sincer LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. 8 • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 Lori Rosenstein - Army and Navy Academ^|Mndows Page 1 From: Willis Fisher <wfisher@tbparchitecture.com> To: "'Lrose@ci.carisbad.ca.us"' <Lrose@ci.carlsbad.ca.us> Date: 6/12/02 3:00PM Subject: Army and Navy Academy Windows Lori, I just talked with Pat Kelly, City Building Department, he said he has yet to talk to you about the changes that Tony Depaola, tBP, submitted to you for your review. I wanted you to know that I will be following up. I discussed changes with Tony so I can answer any questions you may have. I have one or two of my own for you. 1. Do we have to change the windows at the Toilet/Shower Rooms where the Towers occur? Or can they remain as they are? 2. Do we have to change the windows adjacent to the doors in the Foyers at the South Elevation? 3. Can all the windows, 1st and 2nd floors, have a head height of 7'-0"? (same height as doors) As you may know, Mr. Kelly issued a "Stop Work" notice until the windows are made to comply with codes, as well as HRC. Pat told me he was expecting a call from you to review the proposed changes. I am hoping you will let me know what decisions are made. I would like to have the "Stop Work" notice lifted so we can continue working as soon as possible. Construction can progress without the windows as long as we know what the sizes will be. Your efforts are appreciated. Please give me a call at your eariiest convenience. Thank you, Willis Fisher 06/25/02 07:41 ©714 673 9267 T.B.P. 12)001/004 Fax Cover Page Date: 06/25/02 To: Lori Rosenstein City of Carlsbad-Housing and Redevelopment Dept Fax#: (760) 720-2037 From: Willis Rsher, tBP/Architecture cc: File 2.4 Proj: Army and Navy Academy Carisbad, Ca Proj No.: 99033.00 P.C. No.: 01^285 # of Page 5! 4, including this cover sheet Architoccure Planning Interiors Managemeni • Message/Memo Lori, Here is the revised window schedule as per mfg's requirements. The only change is window type "A". To achieve 5.7 sq. ft. of clear opening for egress, we have to increase the rough opening to 4'-10". In other words. I lowered the sill 4". (from 2'-6" to 2'-2".) Another option would be to maintain 2-6" sill height and provide an unequal pair window. The width required at window type "A" for egress, given the fixed height, must be at least 38". Or we could provide a double hung window with side lights, (see options # 1 and 2 attached) I wili be out of the office this moming. Please let me know what you think. You can reach me on my cell at 949-280-2449. Thank you, Willis Fisher iBP/Architectur© 2300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach. CA. 92663 ph: 949 673 0300 fax; 949 673 9267 06/25/02 07:41 ©714 673 9267 T.B.P, 121002/004 OS LU QL iij Cl So > ^ UJ LU 06/25/02 07:42 ©714 673 9267 T.B.P, 121003/004 "=j'd"V OD O \ Cl LU X LL \ Cl LU X LL \ Cl LU X LL 7*- 293 ^ "c?a -7^ ub-t' -3'- Luin d d V CQ 06/25/02 07:42 ©714 673 926' T.B.P, ©004/004 Lori Rosenstein - ANA windows Page 1 From: To: Date: Subject: Lori, Willis Fisher <wfisher@tbparchitecture.com> "'Lrose@ci.carlsbad.ca.us'" <Lrose@ci.carlsbad.ca.us> 6/27/02 10:46AM ANA windows I'm wondering if I'll see a letter from you and Pat today. I hope you can fax it to me when it is finalized. Also, I sent a request to change the toilet/shower windows at the north elevation. That was a hasty decision in an effort to satisfy the client. I would like to keep the window as originally approved except that it will be a hopper window which will open in. ANA would like to get as much fresh air as possible into the toilet/shower rooms so this solution would be best and it would not change the appearance of the building. Please advise. Regards, Willis Fisher 06/26/02 11:09 ©714 673 9267 T.B.P. i]001/002 Fax Cover Paae Date: 06/26/02 To: Lori Rosenstein City of Carisbad-Housing and Redevelopment Dept. Architecture Plannine; Ihtecion Attn: Lori Rosenstein Management Fax#: (760)720-2037 From: Willis Fisher, tBP//Vrchitecture cc: Roger Cellini, ANA Proj: Army and Navy Academy Carlsbad, Ca Proj No.: 99033.00 P.C. No.: 01-0285 # of Pages: 2, including this cover sheet Message/Memo Lori, ANA has requested that we change the toileVshower room windows to a single hung which will mateh the rest of the windows on the North Elevation. Attached is a drawing showing the dimensions of the proposed window type "Bl". Please let me know of your concerns. tBP/Architecture 2300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach. CA. 92663 ph: 949 673 0300 fax; 949 673 9267 06/26/02 11:10 ©714 673 9267 T.B.P, [^002/002 N O CO ^1^—^• — ^ R.C. / FIXED FIN. FLR. TYPE • SINCLE HUNG SCALE: 1/4" = ;-0' Bl Lori Rosenstein - ANA Transmittals Page 1 From: Pat Kelley To: Lori Rosenstein Date: 6/24/02 7:22AM Subject: ANA Transmittals Good morning Lori - We should express our written concerns to the ANA and tBP Architects about a number of things re: their resubmitted architecturals and the package of RFI's and transmittals left with the plans. I'm sure you and Debbie have something to say about all their architectural changes as well. The architectural elevations show windows on the dorm bedrooms that may or may not comply with the egress requirements for bedrooms. The North windows appear to meet the dimensional requirements in the code, but the windows on the south side may not. A 3050 single-hung window, which has a very wide reveal (frame) and probably does not open fully may be too small. It is important the architect do research to determine the correct size windows before ordering the windows and further delay the project if they are delivered and turn out to be wrong. We should insist upon seeing the manufacturers "cut sheet" or dimensional sheets before saying any of these windows will be ok. I want to be sure someone out there has done the homework this time. Sorry to be so parochial - but they haven't engendered much trust. The RFI's date from before , during , and after plan check and permit issuance. I cannot tell which ones may have been included into the approved plans during plan check. I strongly suggest they incorporate these into the approved plans by making changes to the full-size sheets where applicable and making a formal resubmittal for a Plan Check Revision (which will include the window and architectural changes). When we get to the end of the project, the plans have to match the work and vice versa. I'll keep the RFI's here for reference , however that does not mean they have received approval for any of them. PatK CC: Debbie Fountain; Mike Peterson; Pete Dreibeibis; Sandra Holder Lori Rosenstein - ANA Window Transmit! Page 1 From: Pat Kelley To: Lori Rosenstein Date: 6/26/02 9:52AM Subject: ANA Window Transmittal It comes down to how will it look on the elevations. The taler window dives into the tile, or they will wantt o lower the tile. The combo window choice is interesting and might look as good as any other option. It is different than the other windows around the buildings however, and if the side lights open into the hallway, they'd get into the path of travel. The sheet doesn't say they're fixed, so I presume they open. I'll stay tuned and withold further comment. PatK ( Till Z'-(?" O^OOVX^ \DO;\A(rO, I 2^ WWW A O^V^^OA \ 3. WiA^-WtWI^**^ -^^"^ 0^ 7^ KDU- ,9-Z 7^ CQ GO LU < o in CJ) Q CL. >- LU —J < o vD z M < _1 vO lU O \D CD o D lU a: LU b >-< D- D ^ LU lu QL R- 2: CL lU O ^- lu ,9} < z ^ CQ CO P o pj <; lU o o D lU I— O lU lU 3: LU 0^ vD lU Of O O -J _i < o D < in lU O D O D z o Ql vn of lU h-vn < D- lU Of O < §1 <5 ^LU <liJ r- Of ^P <0f \- LU lU I— lU a: > z vn z LU LU a: o vn vn LU a: < D z < > lU -J CD < Of lU O- o < z < vn sn vD UJ D 0- Of LU »-vn < <0 ILl o \ D LU X \ D LU X \ D LU X 7^ -7^ 7^ vn vnii- of luin 7^ •3"dV „b-L CJ? CJ) C?5 < o vn CJ? z o lU < o vn ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY Inspirin£f Excellence Since 1910 July 17, 2002 Lori Rosenstein Management Analyst Carlsbad Housing and Redevelopment 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B Carlsbad, California 92008 RE: DORMFTORY WINDOW ELEVATIONS Dear Ms. Rosenstein, I have enclosed two full size elevations to depict the window selections for approval by Housing and Redevelopment. One elevation is showing the slider style window on the south facade. The second elevation is showing the asymmetrical pair of windows located in the 6' opening located also on the south face. The Army and Navy Academy requests approval for the slider style window on the south elevation (type A). The Academy approves of the double hung Windows proposed on north elevation (types B, Bl, and C) and the double hung Windows located at the lobby located on the south elevation (type D). ThanJ_ Roger Cellini Director of Facilities Management Cell. (760) 801-7147 Post Office Box 3000 Carlsbad, CA 92018 (760) 729-2385 Fax (760) 434-1890 www.army-navyacademy.com GQ 0^ LU 0-O- o 31 GQ CJ) ID in LU z a. LU < o vn CJ) O I II uli < o vn vO z M < _1 vD UJ Of O vn CD D UJ z Of UJ a. Ql I- UJ = 1^ Of UJ lU Q- 0-5: 0- LU Ot-ic = 0- |y o< < z o D UJ H-O LU LU vn vn UJ vD UJ Of o o -J < o < < _ vn LU iT) UJ V- Of V L-UJ I- SK S OOO izi i — CN O D z ID § Of ZD vn 0^ UJ H-vn < _j UJ Of o u_ < §1 << r-Of =JP <0f H- IU UJ «— *^ lU tf Of Of UJ O > z cn vn z UJ UJ Of o vn < L-vn vn UJ Of _j < D z < > LU -J CQ < UJ o D Of < vn vn UJ D > Q- <3 IJJ O 0^ \ D UJ X u_ , \ D UJ X u_ , \ D UJ X u_ , 7^ 7^ Mb-il7 vn . vnu-j^vn ujir> 7^ CJ) CJ) Z l-o o < o vn CJ? z n= uu z l-o Q- o UJ < o vn Lori Rosenstein - Egress Windows Page 1 From: Pat Kelley To: wfisher@tbparchitecture.com Date: 7/18/02 7:27AM Subject: Egress Windows Willis - following our phone conversation yesterday afternoon, the windows detailed on the FAX dated 7-16-02 appear to comply with the egress requirements of the UBC (windows A and C). These windows should be shown on the revised plans which still need to be processed with all other revisions through the front counter at the Faraday Center. Thanks PatK CC: Debbie Fountain; Lori Rosenstein; Mike Peterson Transmittal Date: To: Attn: Proj: Proj No.: P.C. No.: From: cc: 7/22/02 City of Carisbad Building Department 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, Ca 92008 Mike Peterson New Dormitory Building & Parking Lot 99033.00 01-0285 Willis Fisher, tBP/Architecture File 6.6 Architecture Plannmg Interiors Management Signature: Transmitting I 11 Change Orders I 11 Prints • I Construction Docs I I I Specifications • • Copy of Letter ol Submittal I 11 Under Separate Cover I I I Shop Drawings i IM Samples I 11 Preliminary Drawings I 11 Diskettes • I Other Qty Description (2) sets architectural drawings (1) ea. RFI's, Bulletins and Addenda • Message Record set incorporating all Addenda, RFI's and Bulletins. • • • • • For Your Use Approved as Corrected Approved Correct & Return For Approval Please Return • • • • U.P.S. U.P.S. Overnight U.P.S. 2"*^ Day Fed Ex • I O.C.B. Delivery tBP Delivery O I U.S. Mail • tBP/Architecture 2300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA. 92663 ph: 949 673 0300 fax: 949 673 9267 ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY Inspirin£f Excellence Since 1910 July 17, 2002 Lori Rosenstein Management Analyst Carlsbad Housing and Redevelopment 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B Carlsbad, California 92008 RE: APPROVAL OF DORMITORY CONSTRUCTION CHANGES Dear Ms. Rosenstein, I have reviewed the construction drawings provided by tBP Architecture. Army and Navy Academy approve the corrections within the architectural record set dated July 17, 2002. Director of Facilities Management Cell. (760) 801-7147 Post Office Box 3000 Carlsbad, CA 92018 (760) 729-2385 Fax (760) 434-1890 www.army-navyacademy.com Debbie Fountain - Egress Windows Page 1 From: Pat Kelley To: wfisher@tbparchitecture.com Date: 7/18/02 7:27AM Subject: Egress Windows Willis - following our phone conversation yesterday afternoon, the windows detailed on the FAX dated 7-16-02 appear to comply with the egress requirements of the UBC (windows A and C). These windows should be shown on the revised plans which still need to be processed with all other revisions through the front counter at the Faraday Center. Thanks PatK CC: Debbie Fountain; Lori Rosenstein; Mike Peterson Army & Navy Academy RP99-14/CDP99-49 7/3/02 Page 2 It is important to note that there is currently a Stop Work Order on the property. The only work permitted to be done on-site is that which was approved by Pat Kelley to prepare the building for the installation of the new windows. After reviewing the Request for Information (RFI) bulletins which are dated before, during, and after plan check and permit issuance it is unclear which may have been included into the approved plans during plan check. Therefore, these changes must be incorporated into the approved plans by making the changes to the full-size sheets where applicable and making a formal resubmittal for a Plan Check Revision, which will include window and architectural changes. Anv chanaes to the buildina plans should not occur until the Housina & Redevelopment Department has reviewed the revised buildina elevations. The purpose of the plan check revisions is so the City can maintain an officiai record of the building plans for the dormitory showing exactly what will be built. Mr. Kelley will keep the RFI's for reference; however, this in no way constitutes approval of the RFI's. That determination can only be made through the plan check revision process. Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813 If you have any questions regarding this correspondence. Since LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst C: Debbie Fountain, Housing & Redevelopment Director Pat Kelley, Principal Building Inspector Citv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department July 3.2002 WILLIS FISHER TBP ARCHITECTURE 2300 NEWPORT BLVD NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 SUBJECT: ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY DORMITORY (RP99-14/CDP99-49) Housing & Redevelopment staff, with the assistance of Principal Building Inspector Pat Kelley, has reviewed the revised building elevations submitted on June 19, 2002, which incorporate the building changes made by the Army & Navy Academy from the approved building plans. It is our understanding that these plan revisions were made following the issuance of a Stop Work Notice requiring the removal of non-code compliant windows installed in the dormitory that were inconsistent with both the approved redevelopment permit and the approved bCiilding permit for the project. Following our review of the plans, staff supports the buiiding modificatk>ns as depicted on the proposed building elevations and revised window schedule submitted to the Housing & Redevelopment Department on June 19, 2002 with the following additional changes and points of clarification: 1. In order to meet egress requirements. Type A windows along the south building elevation shall be replaced by windows shown in Option #1 as depk^ted in the facsimile sent to the Housing & Redevelopment Department on June 25,2002. More specifically, Type A double hung windows on the south elevation will be 6' wide (3*-2'' and 2'-10"), 4'-6'' wide, with a sill height of 2'-6'' from finish floor elevation. 2. Bathroom windows on the north elevation shall be consistent with the originally approved plans except that they may open in for ventilation. 3. Only windows in the bathroom will consist of patterned or obscure glass, all other windows will be clear glass. 4. Tile shall be maintained at a height of 2'-6'' along the entire perimeter of the building along all four sides. 5. Bronze plaques shall be maintained along the south building elevation. These changes are to be incorporated into a revised set of building elevations, which are to be submitted to the Housing & Redevelopment Department for final approval. In addition to the revised elevations please submit a letter from Army & Navy Academy stating they have reviewed and support the proposed changes. 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 July 18, 2002 ROGER CELLINI ARMY NAVY ACADEMY P.O. BOX 3000 CARLSBAD, CA. 92018 RE: DORMITORY WINDOW ELEVATIONS ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY DORMITORY (RP99-14/CDP99-49) Dear Roger: In response to your request dated July 17, 2002, staff has reviewed your desired proposal to change the windows on the south elevation for the Army & Navy Academy Dormitory from the asymmetrical pair of windows approved in our July 3, 2002 correspondence to Willis Fisher to the slider windows noted in the elevations submitted to our office on July 17, 2002. As I understand your proposal, the slider windows will be used on the south elevation of the dormitory only. The north elevation and the lobby area on the south elevation will continue to utilize the double hung windows as originally approved. Your request to use the slider windows has been approved by the Housing and Redevelopment Department, and the Building Department has indicated that the windows appear to meet the egress requirements. All changes previously discussed with you and the project architect will need to be incorporated into a revised set of building elevations and submitted to the Housing and Redevelopment for fmal approval before they are submitted to the Building Department. As we indicated to Mr. Willis Fisher on July 3"^*^ and to you this week, all revised plans must be submitted with a letter from Army & Navy Academy stating that you have reviewed and approve the set of plans. Please note that the revised plans must include all changes previously noted through RFI bulletins, as noted in our letter to Will Fisher dated July 3, 2002. Changes must be incorporated into the approved plans by making the changes to the full-size sheets where applicable and making a formal resubmittal for a Plan Check Revision, which will include all window and architectural changes. Attached is a copy of the letter forwarded to Willis Fisher on July 3, 2002. Please note that a full set of the revised building elevations must be submitted to the Housing and Redevelopment Department with a letter of approval from the Army Navy Academy before they will be accepted by the Building Department for Plan Check review. Please contact my office at (760) 434-2935 if you have any questions regarding this correspondence, erely, DEBBIE FOUNTAIN Housing and Redevelopment Director C: Pat Kelley, Principal Building Inspector Lori Rosenstein, Management Analyst 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 07/16/02 08:02 ©714 673 9267 T.B.P. ©001/003 Fax Transmittal Date; 7/16/2002 To: City Of Carlsbad Building Department 1635 Faraday Avenue Arebitocmre Cartsbad. CA 92008 ^ Fax No.: 760-602-8560 Management Attn: Pat Kelly Proj: Dormitory #1 Proj No.: 99033.00 P.C.#: 01-0285 From: Willis Fisher, tBP/Archkecture cc: Roger Cellini, Army and Navy Academy Debbie Fduntain, Housing and Redevetopment Committee # pages: (3) including this oover sheet Message: Pat, As requested by Debbie Fountain, Housing and Redevelopment Committee, her© is the window schedule for the dormitory. Ms. Fountain requested that you verify the egress requirements. As per the letter from Lori Rosenstein, HRC, dated July 3, 2002. all window types were excepted as proposed, however, the Army and Navy Academy would prefer to provkle a sliding window in lieu of the unequal pair of single hung windows for window type "A". As required by the Crty of Carlsbad, window types "A" and "C" are required to have a minimum of 5.7 sq. ft clear opening for egress. The proposed windows, as designed by Keystone Industries, meet the egress requirements. Window type "A" (sliding window) will be 49.75 inches high by 31 inches wide to provide 10.7 sq. ft. clear. Window type "C" will be 24.062 inches high by approx. 40 inches wide to provide 6.7 sq. ft. clear. The attached window schedule vi«s designed by the window manufacturer to accommodate the egress requirements for this project. The windows will be manufactured based on these requirements upon City of Carisbad and Housing and Redevelopment Committee approval. The windows will also be provided with an operable screen. Please let me know if there are any concerns. Thank you, Willis Fisher tBP/Architecture 2300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA. 92663 ph: 949 673 0300 fax: 949 673 9267 07/16/02 08:02 0714 673 9267 T.B.P. @]002/003 o • U-I i vD Q in — *0 fV LJ lis zl < < HI o ILI fi! < tr ift z 5 I in $ LU % p i 1^ 55 CL 07/16/02 08:03 Q714 673 9267 T.B.P, (2)003/003 0 0 \ LU \ LU \ LU LLI in •=l':j'V ZD CO LU LU < e AUGUST 21,2002 TO: BUILDING DEPARTMENT FROM: Management Analyst, Redevelopment Department ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY NEW DORMITORY (RP99-14/CDP99-49) PLAN CHECK NO. PCR 02-220 I have reviewed the revised building plans for the above referenced project. The project is currently under a "Stop Work" order pending approval of the plan check revisions. The Housing & Redevelopment Department finds the plan check revisions to be consistent with the approved Major Redevelopment Permit approved by the Housing and Redevelopment Commission. No further land use action is required at this time. Pending completion of the final plan check by EsGil, the Housing and Redevelopment Department supports issuance of the permit for the plan check revisions for this project. This information has been entered into Permits Plus. If you have any questions, please contact me at x2813. LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Citv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department October 26, 2001 MIKE KOHLS TBP ARCHITECTURE 2300 NEWPORT BLVD NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 SUBJECT: ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY DORMITORY (RP99-14/CDP99-49) Dear Mike: The Housing & Redevelopment Department has received the revised colored elevation and associated building plans for the new Army & Navy Academy Dormitory on the south side of Pacific Avenue. I have reviewed the plans along with Housing & Redevelopment Director Debbie Fountain. Overall, the consensus is the plans are a significant improvement with the combination of the front wall/fence along Pacific Ave., added landscaping, building color variations, and building recesses serving to break up the north facing fagade. Therefore, it has been determined that the plans are satisfactory enough to move forward with making the modifications to the building permit plan check set. In addition, I have some questions that require further clarification and some suggestions on how to incorporate all the necessary information into the building plan set. The questions and suggestions are as follows: 1. Is the new entry gate on the front wall/fence necessary for pedestrian access? It ties into the 3' wide separation between the buildings. Do you want to encourage use of this small walkway as a pedestrian access? XTrA^r*^ ^VAV.VXVAC« o<.cceS,S» <^K\Va. 2. Do you intend to provide a pedestrian walkway between the wall/fence and the front of the dormitory? If so, please indicate on the site plan, A-CCV^J.WV.VJ\ ''NOV- 3. Does it make sense to only include the wall/fence combination in front of the new o.ccess. dormitory? What about the remainder of the property's frontage on Pacific Avenue? a&te^s^^ Should the fence be continued along the entire frontage for continuity? r>qTV^ Vli o*^ ^ >^'^- building plan check set include the landscape wall elevation detail on either the Ar<>^ "oi^h elevation or the landscape plan. Either way it must be included somewhere in the ^Jh^^ building plans. 5. Revise the landscape plan to include the type of flowering vines to be planted along the \<)>^front fence. (r^s^^s 6. I Still haven't received the color samples of the exterior wall. Please submit these as soon as possible. Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813 to discuss these issues further. Sincefelyv..^^^ l:sr?^^^4^i-^ LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 ^ Transmittal Date: To: Attn: Proj: 10/30/01 City of Carisbad -Housing and Redevelopment Department 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B Carisbad, Ca 92008 Lori Rosenstein New Dormitory Building & Pari<ing Lot Architecture Planning Interiors Management Proj No.: DSA No.: From: cc: 99033.00 Mike Kohls, tBP/Architecture File 6.6 Signature: Transmitting [m I Change Orders • I Prints O I Construction Pocs HH I Specifications • I Copy of Letter H I Submittal O I Under Separate Cover HH I Shop Prawings • I Samples (ZD I Preliminary Prawings ol Piskettes • I Other Qty 2 Description Paint chips /s/oi Message The attached paint samples are being submitted for approval. ^ ^^^^ • • • • For Your Use Approved as Corrected Approved Correct & Return For Approval Please Return • • • • U.P.S. U.P.S. Overnight U.P.S. 2""* Pay Fed Ex • • • O.C.B. Pelivery tBP Pelivery U.S. Mail tBP/Architecture 2300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA. 92663 ph: 949 673 0300 fax; 949 673 9267 Transmittal Date: To: Attn: Proj: 01/22/01 Housing and Redevelopment 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B Carlsbad, Ca 92008 Lori Rosenstein New Dormitory Building & Parking Lot Architecture Planning Interiors Management Proj No.: 99033.00 PC No.:01-0285 From: Willis Fisher, tBP/Architecture cc: M. Kohls, File 6.6 Signature: Transmitting IZHI Change Orders ol Prints OI Construction Pocs O I Specifications OI Copy of Letter • I Submittal CZ] I Under Separate Cover HZ I Shop Prawings Ol Samples OI Preliminary Prawings ol Piskettes O I Other Qty Description 1 ea. Color samples • Message Lori, Here are the color samples for the exterior of the new Dormitory building. The darker shade will be on the offsets. Please let me know if anything else will be required. Thank you, Willis Fisher O O o o a For Your Use Approved as Corrected Approved Correct & Return For Approval Please Return O O o o U.P.S. U.P.S. Overnight U.P.S. 2"" Pay Fed Ex O O o o O.C.B. Pelivery tBP Pelivery U.S. Mail tBP/Architecture 2300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA. 92663 ph: 949 673 0300 fax: 949 673 9267 AUGUST 31, 2001 TO: milLDING DEPARTMENT FROM: Management Analyst, Redevelopment Department ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY NEW DORMITORY (RP99-14/CDP99-49) PLAN CHECK NO. 010285 I have reviewed the revised building plans for the above referenced project. In accordance with Housing & Redevelopment Commission Resolution No. 346 identifying the conditions of approval for the proposed project, the following items must be completed prior to issuance of the building permit: As a condition of project approval, the applicant was directed to increase the building articulation and landscaping along the north facing building elevation subject to the approval of the Housing & Redevelopment Director. In response to a modified building elevation submitted to the Housing & Redevelopment Director, the applicant was sent a letter, dated August 15, 2001, identifying remaining issues that must be addressed prior to the Director making a final decision on the design of the project. A copy of that letter is attached for reference. The applicant is advised to address these issues and receive final design approval from the Housing & Redevelopment Director prior to adding these revisions to the building plans. In addition to the issues outlined in the August 15*^ letter, the following conditions must be satisfied prior to the issuance of building permits: The Developer shall include, as part of the plans submitted for any permit plan check, a reduced legible version of all approving resolution(s) in a 24" X 36" blueline drawing format. Q Prior to the issuance of the building permit, Developer shall submit to the ^"v^"^^'*^ ^ Notice of Restriction to be filed in the office of the County Recorder, \o ^ subject to the satisfaction of the Housing and Redevelopment Director, A^**^ ^ notifying all interested parties and successors in interest that the City of V'^"^ V ^^'''^'^^^ issued a Major Redevelopment Permit and Coastal V0>p Development Permit by Resolution(s) No. 276 and 277 on the real -i^*^ « c^'property owned by the Developer. Said Notice of Restriction shall note the vo^^^ (jJi)^^'^^ property description, location of the file containing complete project details ^\ ^ and all conditions of approval as well as any conditions or restrictions specified for inclusion in the Notice of Restriction. The Housing and Redevelopment Director has the authority to execute and record an amendment to the notice which modifies or terminates said notice upon a showing of good cause by the Developer or successor in interest. Army & Navy Academy D^^tory Plancheck #010285 Page 2 3. The Developer shall submit and obtain Planning Director approval of an exterior lighting plan including parking areas. All lighting shall be designed to reflect downward and avoid any impacts on adjacent homes or property. This information has been entered into Permits Plus. If you have any questions, please contact me at x2813. LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Citv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department August 15, 2001 MIKE KOHLS TBP ARCHITECTURE 2300 NEWPORT BLVD NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 SUBJECT: ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY DORMITORY (RP99-14/CDP99-49) Dear Mike: The Housing & Redevelopment Department has received the revised colored elevations for the new Army & Navy Academy Dormitory on the south side of Pacific Avenue. I have reviewed the plans along with Housing & Redevelopment Director Debbie Fountain. As you know, the Housing & Redevelopment Commission approved the project with the condition that the north facing building facade be redesigned to provide more landscaping and building articulation to the satisfaction of the Housing & Redevelopment Director. The following issues must be addressed prior to the Housing & Redevelopment Director making a final decision on the design: 1. On the site plan, please indicate the location of the wrought iron fence/wall in relation to the building and the front property line. V 2. On the building elevations, please clarify that the total height of the fence, including the 2-foot high perimeter wall, will not exceed a maximum of 5 feet as measured from exterior grade. 3. The revised colored elevations do not indicate the buildings will be "pure white" as indicated on the color and materials board presented to the Housing & Redevelopment Commission. The colored elevations must be modified to accurately show the proposed building colors. In addition, corresponding sample chips of materials and colors shall be submitted to the Housing & Redevelopment Department so there is no question as to what the final building colors will be. \ovD^ 4. The revised colored elevations, which are being submitted for final approval, -M^-^ must accurately depict the proposed vegetation along the north side of the w>i^* building. This landscaping must be consistent with the final landscape plan. The ^(^st^'^ preliminary landscape plan indicates the placement of 8 15-gallon New Zealand Christmas Trees along Pacific Avenue. Staff-supportc modifying the landsGapq pLlan tn rnplgn^ tfiA [>lnii,f -y^nhn'j ChriStmRfi Tr^^S with th^ plnr^tinj nf Inrgnr nannpy tr^a^c^ flg gi^nwn nn th<a revised colored elevations Mowovor, the trees must bo of a spocios that rooult in tho height and fullness Indicated on Uie 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 @ Army & Navy Academy RP99-14/CDP99-49 8/15/01 Paqe 2 'eetefed elevations and thp final landsrapp plan-niu3l bo inodifiod auuuiUiiiyly. X' 5. Floors plans must be modified to cleariy indicate window recesses and tower ^ projections as shown on revised elevations. 6. It appears the proposed changes to the building facade and landscaping will necessitate subsequent changes to the following building plan sheets: site plan, floor plan, building elevations, and final landscape plan. It is advisable to hold off making these changes to the building plans until you receive final design approval from the Housing & Redevelopment Director. f7.J Finally, please note that as a condition of approval, a reproducible 24" x 36" mylar of the final site plan must be submitted to the Housing & Redevelopment Department prior to the issuance of the building permit. Once again, it is advisable to wait until you receive final approval on the building plans before creating the mylar. Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813 if you have any questions regarding the information contained in this letter. Sincerel) LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst c: Debbie Fountain, Housing & Redevelopment Director Citv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department August 15, 2001 MIKE KOHLS TBP ARCHITECTURE 2300 NEWPORT BLVD NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 SUBJECT: ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY DORMITORY (RP99-14/CDP99-49) Dear Mike: The Housing & Redevelopment Department has received the revised colored elevations for the new Army & Navy Academy Dormitory on the south side of Pacific Avenue. I have reviewed the plans along with Housing & Redevelopment Director Debbie Fountain. As you know, the Housing & Redevelopment Commission approved the project with the condition that the north facing building facade be redesigned to provide more landscaping and building articulation to the satisfaction of the Housing & Redevelopment Director. The following issues must be addressed prior to the Housing & Redevelopment Director making a final decision on the design: 1. On the site plan, please indicate the location of the wrought iron fence/wall in relation to the building and the front property line. 2. On the building elevations, please clarify that the total heioht of the fence, including the 2-foot high perimeter wall, will not exceed a maximum of 5 feet as measured from exterior grade. 3. The revised colored elevations do not indicate the buildings will be "pure white" as indicated on the color and materials board presented to the Housing & Redevelopment Commission. The colored elevations must be modified to accurately show the proposed building colors. In addition, corresponding sample chips of materials and colors shall be submitted to the Housing & Redevelopment Department so there is no question as to what the final building colors will be. 4. The revised colored elevations, which are being submitted for final approval, must accurately depict the proposed vegetation along the north side of the building. This landscaping must be consistent with the final landscape plan. The preliminary landscape plan indicates the placement of 8 15-gallon New Zealand Christmas Trees along Pacific Avenue. Staff supports modifying the landscape plan to replace the New Zealand Christmas Trees with the planting of larger canopy trees as shown on the revised colored elevations. However, the trees must be of a species that result in the height and fullness indicated on the 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 @ Army & Navy Academy ^^^^ ^ft^k RP99-14/CDP99-49 W 8/15/01 Page 2 colored elevations and the final landscape plan must be modified accordingly. 5. Floors plans must be modified to clearly indicate window recesses and tower projections as shown on revised elevations. 6. It appears the proposed changes to the building facade and landscaping will necessitate subsequent changes to the following building plan sheets: site plan, floor plan, building elevations, and final landscape plan. It is advisable to hold off making these changes to the building plans until you receive final design approval from the Housing & Redevelopment Director. 7. Finally, please note that as a condition of approval, a reproducible 24" x 36" mylar of the final site plan must be submitted to the Housing & Redevelopment Department prior to the issuance of the building permit. Once again, it is advisable to wait until you receive final approval on the building plans before creating the mylar. Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813 If you have any questions regarding the information contained in this letter. LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst c: Debbie Fountain, Housing & Redevelopment Director Citv of Carlsbad FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL DATE: 12/20/01 TIME SENT: 12:15 p.m. No. of pages transmitted (including fax transmittal page): 3 No. of pages transmitted (including fax transmittal page): 3 TO: Willis Fisher FROM: Lori Rosenstein COMPANY: tBP Architecture DEPT: HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT PHONE: (949) 673-0300 PHONE #: (760) 434- 2813 FAX (949) 673-9267 FAX #: (760) 720-2037 E-MAIL #: lrose@ci.carisbad.ca.us Re: Army & Navy Academy Dormitory I have attached a copy of the memo to the City of Carlsbad Building Department outlining the fmal corrections to the building plans. I have also sent a copy of the memo to Roger Cellini. The only item not included in the memo is the need for new color chips for the archways on the north side of the building. A very pale gray or blue-gray would be sufficient. The fmal color should be added to the fmish schedule in the building plan set. Please call me if you have any questions. c: Roger Cellini, Army & Navy Academy (760) 729-9274 fax Ttiis written message is for the exclusive use of the addressee and may contain confidential, privileged, and non-disclosable information. If the recipient of ttiis message is not the addressee, or a person responsible for delivering the message to the addressee, then the recipient is proliibited from reading or using this message in any way. If you have received this message by mistake, please call us immediately and destroy the telecopy message. Housing & Redevelopment Department • 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B • Carlsbad, Califomia 92008 October 16,2001 TO: HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR FROM: MANAGEMENT ANALYST Army & Navy Academy Dormitory (RP99-14/CDP99-49) The purpose of this memo is to bring you up to date on the status of the Army & Navy Academy Dormitory approved by the Housing & Redevelopment Commission on July 24, 2001. I have spoken with the applicant's representative, Tony DePaola of TBP Architecture, regarding the status of permits associated with the project. Late last week, Mr. DePaola expressed frustration with the amount of time it was taking to process the grading permit for the project As of today, Mr. DePaola said he expects the grading permit to be issued as soon as tomorrow. All departments have approved the issuance of the grading permit and Engineering is waiting for the applicant's representative to submit the final mylars of the grading plan before the permit can be issued. Mr. DePaola stated the mylars would be submitted tomorrow, at which time he expects the grading permit to be issued. I asked Mr. DePaola specifically what it was about the process that was particulariy frustrating. He stated that unfortunately he was unfamiliar with our process and was given piecemeal information about what was required of them. He said that in hindsight he should have requested a pre-construction meeting with the Engineering staff to get a better picture of the total requirements for the grading permit. He said a significant amount of time was taken up by processes that had to take place prior to the issuance of the grading permit, such as bonding for improvements and processing the dedication of Mountain View Drive. The applicant's representatives were not aware of these additional processes initially and did not factor them into their own timeline. As for the building permit, I expect it to be issued for the dormitory prior to the completion of the grading. As you know, the Housing & Redevelopment Commission approved the project with the condition that the north facing building facade be redesigned to provide more landscaping and building articulation to the satisfaction of the Housing & Redevelopment Director. On August 15, 2001, after reviewing with you the revised building elevations submitted by the applicant's representative, I sent TBP Architecture a detailed letter outlining additional information that was needed prior to you making a final decision on the design of the project. Last week I received revised plans for the north facing building elevation. Upon initial review, it appears the applicant's representatives have addressed a majority of the issues outlined in my August 15*^ correspondence. However, the final building color is still unclear and will require some clarification from the architect. As time permits, I would like to meet with you to review the modifications submitted for the north facing building elevation. Once the design is finalized, the applicant's representatives will be able to complete the final steps of the plancheck process. However, construction of the dormitory cannot be initiated until the grading of the building pad and the parking lot at the corner of Mountain View Drive & Pacific Avenue is complete and certified. Overall, it appears the applicant's representatives are on the right track with the grading permit expected to be issued tomorrow and a building permit to follow within the next few weeks. AUGUST 31, 2001 TO: BUILDING DEPARTMENT FROM: Management Analyst, Redevelopment Department ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY NEW DORMITORY (RP99-14/CDP99-49) PLAN CHECK NO. 010285 I have reviewed the revised building plans for the above referenced project. In accordance with Housing & Redevelopment Commission Resolution No. 346 identifying the conditions of approval for the proposed project, the following items must be completed prior to issuance of the building permit: As a condition of project approval, the applicant was directed to increase the building articulation and landscaping along the north facing building elevation subject to the approval of the Housing & Redevelopment Director. In response to a modified building elevation submitted to the Housing & Redevelopment Director, the applicant was sent a letter, dated August 15, 2001, Identifying remaining issues that must be addressed prior to the Director making a final decision on the design of the project. A copy of that letter is attached for reference. The applicant is advised to address these issues and receive final design approval from the Housing & Redevelopment Director prior to adding these revisions to the building plans. In addition to the issues outlined in the August 15^*^ letter, the following conditions must be satisfied prior to the issuance of building permits: 1. The Developer shall include, as part of the plans submitted for any permit plan check, a reduced legible version of all approving resolution(s) in a 24" X 36" blueline drawing format. 2. Prior to the issuance of the building permit, Developer shall submit to the City a Notice of Restriction to be filed in the office of the County Recorder, subject to the satisfaction of the Housing and Redevelopment Director, notifying all interested parties and successors in interest that the City of Carisbad has issued a Major Redevelopment Permit and Coastal Development Permit by Resolution(s) No. 276 and 277 on the real property owned by the Developer. Said Notice of Restriction shall note the property description, location of the file containing complete project details and all conditions of approval as well as any conditions or restrictions specified for inclusion in the Notice of Restriction. The Housing and Redevelopment Director has the authority to execute and record an amendment to the notice which modifies or terminates said notice upon a showing of good cause by the Developer or successor in interest. Army & Navy Academy Do^^ory Plancheck #010285 Page 2 3. The Developer shall submit and obtain Planning Director approval of an exterior lighting plan including parking areas. All lighting shall be designed to reflect downward and avoid any impacts on adjacent homes or property. This information has been entered into Permits Plus. If you have any questions, please contact me at x2813. LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Lori Rosenstein - Army & Navy Academy Page 1 From: Lori Rosenstein To: Mike Grim Date: 12/21/01 9:01AM Subject: Army & Navy Academy Mike: Yesterday, I sent you a copy of the memo I sent to the Building Department following my review of the Army & Navy Academy Dormitory. The building plans have been returned to the Building Department. Can you please review the lighting plan for conformance with City regulations. As you know, the standard lighting condition makes the plan subject to Planning Director's approval, so I didn't take a look at it. If you have any questions and/or concerns please contact me today as I will be out of the office all next week. Thank you for your help on this project. Lori Lori Rosenstein - Re: ANA Page 1 From: "Michael Shirey" <mikesjd@hotmail.com> To: <Lrose@ci.carlsbad.ca.us> Date: 12/20/01 3:40PM Subject: Re: ANA Hi Lori, If this is along Pacific Avenue, they are not dedicating any ROW there, except at the corners of Mountain View and Ocean. There is already 30 feet from centeriine, and that is all that is required. I got a call from Willis Fisher, of TBP Architecture, regarding this; I will call him and inform him of the above, and tell him to work with his surveyor to not have a fence encroach on the above-mentioned corners. -Mike S. >From: "Lori Rosenstein" <Lrose@ci.carlsbad.ca.us> >To: <mikesjd@hotmail.com> >CC: <wfisher@tbparchitecture.com> >Subject: ANA >Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 11:21:48 -0800 > >Mlke: >The architects for ANA are adding a decorative wall/fence on the north side >of the proposed dormitory. The fence will be located between the street >and the building. The building is setback 15' from "proposed future >right-of-way". I would like the fence to be located at least 5' from the >"proposed future right-of-way". Will this impact future curb, gutter and >sidewalk? Can you please clarify if the "proposed future right-of-way" Is >in fact the location of the new property line after dedication? > >Thanks, >Lori Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. DECEMBER 20, 2001 TO: toliDING DEPARTMENT FROM: Management Analyst, Redevelopment Department ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY NEW DORMITORY (RP99-14/CDP99-49) PLAN CHECKNO. 010285 I have reviewed the revised building plans for the above referenced project. In accordance with Housing and Redevelopment Commission Resolution No. 346 identifying the conditions of approval for the proposed project, the following Items must be completed prior to issuance of the building permit: 1. The Developer shall include, as part of the plans submitted for any permit plan check, a reduced legible version of all approving resolution(s) in a 24" X 36" blueline drawing format. 2. Prior to the issuance of the building permit, Developer shall submit to the City a Notice of Restriction to be filed in the office oif the County Recorder, subject to the satisfaction of the Housing and Redevelopment Director. The Notice of Restriction has been prepared and given to Roger Cellini of Army & Navy Academy for signatures. The document must be returned to the Housing and Redevelopment Department for final processing prior to issuance of the building permit. 3. The Developer shall submit and obtain Planning Director approval of an exterior lighting plan including parking areas. All lighting shall be designed to reflect downward and avoid any impacts on adjacent homes or property. 4. Prior to the issuance of the building permit, the developer shall submit to the Housing and Redevelopment Department a reproducible 24" x 36" mylar copy of the final site plan reflecting the conditions approved by the Housing and Redevelopment Commission. 5. In accordance with General Condition No. 22 of DRB Resolution No. 276, approved as part of Housing and Redevelopment Commission Resolution No. 346, the tower elements must be increased 18" in depth towards Pacific Avenue in order to be equal to the depth of the tower elements on the south side of the building. In short the tower elements must project a total of 3 feet from the face of the building. This change must be made on all affected building plan sheets. Army & Navy Academy Donmtory Plancheck #010285 Page 2 6. Decorative wall/fence on north side of building must be setback 5' from property line. This change must be made on all affected building plan sheets (AS-1 and Landscape Plan Sheet 4 of 5) 7. Building elevations should include a dimension of the overall height from finished floor to the ridgeline of the building and the tower elements. This information has been entered into Permits Plus. If you have any questions, please contact me at x2813. LORI H. ROSENSTEIN PLANNING DEPARTIVIENT BUILDING PLAN CHECK REVIEW CHECKLIST o £ Plan Check No. CBOlHl^S Planner LOv^C RD:^.^^ APN: Address 2.loDf. C(v^lsh(l\ B\\J(\. Phone (760)-60^ ^3'A--2-%^>s ZA Type of Project & Use: l\^{X Do^^YV^ Net Project Density:. Zoning: V General Plan: VP. Facilities Management Zone: DU/AC CFD rmlnnf] # '^/(VDate of participation: Circle One Remaining net dev acres: • • (For non-residential development: Type of land used created by this permit: ) Legend: ^ Item Complete Item Incomplete - Needs your action Environmental Review Required: YES NO TYPE DATE OF COMPLETION: lh^lo\ i^.^U<.,^ V^3t>^ Compliance with conditions of approval? If not, state conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval: I I I I Discretionary Action Required: YES NO TYPE RP APPROVAL/RESO. NO. &RC 3^0 DATE llmlOl PROJECT NO. gD^q-\H/f ^9 OTHER RELATED CASES: Compliance with conditions or approval? If not, state conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval: Sgft. OMCILC\>QA TSNJ^VXP . • • Coastal Zone Assessment/Compliance Project site located in Coastal Zone? YES CA Coastal Commission Authority? YES N0_ NO If California Coastal Commission Authority: Contact them at - 7575 Metropolitan Drive, Suite 103, SanDiego CA 92108-4402; (619) 767-2370 Determine status (Coastal Permit Required or Exempt): C^P (kyyYC^O^(j Coastal Permit Determination Form already completed? YES NO If NO, complete Coastal Permit Determination Form now. Coastal Permit Determination Log #: Follow-Up Actions: 1) Stamp Building Plans as "Exempt" or "Coastal Permit Required" (at minimum Floor Plans). 2) Complete Coastal Permit Determination Log as needed. H:\ADMIN\COUNTER\BldgPlnchkRevChklst I Lori Rosenstein - Army & Navy Academy Diimriltory Pagel i^jpni From: Lori Rosenstein To: Mike Grim Subject: Army & Navy Academy Dormitory Mike: Willis Fisher from TBP Architecture came in today to modify the building plans for ANA Dormitory. He has satisfied all items required as set forth in my memo to the Building Department, dated December 20, 2001, with the following exceptions: 1) Lighting plan must be reviewed and approved by Planning; and 2) I waived the condition requiring the incorporation of the approving resolutions In the building plan set. All other issues have been resolved. A mylar of the final site plan has been submitted to us and I will send it to you for filing. I will be out of the office until December 31st. In my absence, upon approval of the lighting plan and your comfort with the remainder of the plans, can you please go into Permits Plus and okay the issuance of the building permit? The applicant is anticipating pad approval sometime next week. If there are issues that need discussion, just leave me a message and I will get back to you. Thank you in advance for your assistance on this matter. Lori 00: Mike Peterson Citv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department July 3, 2002 WILLIS FISHER TBP ARCHITECTURE 2300 NEWPORT BLVD NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 SUBJECT: ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY DORMITORY (RP99-14/CDP99-49) Housing & Redevelopment staff, with the assistance of Principal Building Inspector Pat Kelley, has reviewed the revised building elevations submitted on June 19, 2002, which incorporate the building changes made by the Army & Navy Academy from the approved building plans. It is our understanding that these plan revisions were made following the issuance of a Stop Work Notice requiring the removal of non-code compliant windows installed in the dormitory that were inconsistent with both the approved redevelopment permit and the approved building permit for the project. Following our review of the plans, staff supports the building modifications as depicted on the proposed building elevations and revised window schedule submitted to the Housing & Redevelopment Department on June 19, 2002 with the following additional changes and points of clarification: 1. In order to meet egress requirements. Type A windows along the south building elevation shall be replaced by windows shown in Option #1 as depicted in the facsimile sent to the Housing & Redevelopment Department on June 25, 2002. More specifically. Type A double hung windows on the south elevation will be 6' wide (3'-2" and 2'-10"), 4'-6" wide, with a sill height of 2'-6" from finish floor elevation. 2. Bathroom windows on the north elevation shall be consistent with the originally approved plans except that they may open in for ventilation. 3. Only windows in the bathroom will consist of patterned or obscure glass, all other windows will be clear glass. 4. Tile shall be maintained at a height of 2'-6" along the entire perimeter of the building along all four sides. 5. Bronze plaques shall be maintained along the south building elevation. These changes are to be incorporated into a revised set of building elevations, which are to be submitted to the Housing & Redevelopment Department for final approval. In addition to the revised elevations please submit a letter from Army & Navy Academy stating they have reviewed and support the proposed changes. 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 ^ Army & Navy Academy RP99-14/CDP99-49 7/3/02 Page 2 It is important to note that there is currently a Stop Work Order on the property. The only work permitted to be done on-site is that which was approved by Pat Kelley to prepare the building for the installation of the new windows. After reviewing the Request for Information (RFI) bulletins which are dated before, during, and after plan check and permit issuance it is unclear which may have been included into the approved plans during plan check. Therefore, these changes must be incorporated into the approved plans by making the changes to the full-size sheets where applicable and making a formal resubmittal for a Plan Check Revision, which will include window and architectural changes. Anv chanaes to the buildina plans should not occur until the Housina & Redevelopment Department has reviewed the revised buildina elevations. The purpose of the plan check revisions is so the City can maintain an official record of the building plans for the dormitory showing exactly what will be built. Mr. Kelley will keep the RFI's for reference; however, this in no way constitutes approval of the RFI's. That determination can only be made through the plan check revision process. Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813 if you have any questions regarding this correspondence. Since LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst C: Debbie Fountain, Housing & Redevelopment Director Pat Kelley, Principal Building Inspector Lori Rosenstein - Re: ANA Dormitory Page 1 From: To: Date: Subject: David- Jeremy Riddle David Dates 8/26/03 5:16PM Re: ANA Dormitory To add on the Lori's email (if you don't mind, Lori), please keep in mind that this is a privately owned maintained detention basin, and not a publicly maintained facility. All the liability lays with the owner of the property. I had Informed Lori to let the owner know of this and have them make an informed decision on this, but from a "standards Issue" a safety fence Is not required. For public basins we typically do Install them for liability purposes to keep kids out, but I don't see why we should make a private one comply. I seen soccer fields serving as overflow basins that are open while It Is submerged. Persuant to the building codes the facility must only be fenced If the basin is to be used specifically for recreational swimming. Anyway, those are my thoughts. Thanks. »> Lori Rosenstein 08/26/03 05:05PM »> HI David! I understand you are the engineering Inspector for the Army & Navy Academy Dormitory project. As you are aware, they were required to construct a new parking lot at the corner of Mountain View and Pacific Avenue. In the corner of said parking lot is a retention basin. I have been told by the contractor that the retention basin Is no more than 3 feet deep at the deepest point. During a wrap up meeting on final inspection issues, the building contractor asked If a fence would be required around the retention basin. He said he wasn't sure If this was something the City required or a suggestion by their engineering consultant. Before I knew you were the engineering Inspector for the project, I asked Jeremy Riddle if a fence would be required around the retention basin and he said it would not be required if the basin is for storm water purposes. Can you please let me know If a fence around the retention basin was something you required of the applicant for public safety purposes? We would like to avoid the installation of the fence, but I will not compromise public safety for the sake of aesthetics. Please let me know your feelings on this. Thanksl Lori Rosenstein Housing & Redevelopment CC: Lori Rosenstein Lori Rosenstein - Re: Army & Navy Academ^prmitory Page 1 From: Lori Rosenstein To: Jeremy Riddle Subject: Re: Army & Navy Academy Dormitory Jeremy, I told ANA that the fence was not required If the catch basin was related to Storm Water issues. I also told them it was a private responsibility and if they thought a fence was needed for safety reasons that we would need to discuss this further. Thanks for your Input! Lori »> Jeremy Riddle 08/20/03 12:09PM »> Hi Lori- I have not had to install a fence around a catch basin yet, and before I answer, I would like to know why a fence is prompted. Is the catch basin open to allow a person to fall 3-feet or does it have a steel grate cover? Is the engineering inspector asking for this? Is there really a public safety issue to require a fence? Usually a catch basin in the middle of a parking lot does not have a fence around it, so why would this one? I just want make sure before we install a fence it that it really justified. I don't want anybody asking down the road, wtio approved ttiis? Thanks for understanding. Talk to you soon. »> Lori Rosenstein 08/19/03 10:41AM »> Hi Jeremy! We are trying to wrap up the Army & Navy Academy Dormitory on Pacific Avenue in time for school to start. The building is near completion and they are requesting a temporary CofO to get the students moved In before their landscaping is done. My question to you Is this. Mike Shirey originally worked on this project, but I don't know who has been assigned It since. There is a catch basin in the parking lot at the corner of Mountain View and Pacific. The catch basin is no more than 3 feet deep, but I believe a fence will be required around it. Can you please tell me how high the fence needs to be or forward this to the appropriate person? Thanks! Lori Lorl Ro^>enstein -,Re: Army & Navy Academv Dormitory Page 1 From: Colleen Balch To: Lori Rosenstein Date: 8/14/03 9:49AM Subject: Re: Army & Navy Academy Dormitory They haven't completed the sprinkler system or flre alarm system. Until we are able to final those two systems we would not be Inclined to allow occupancy. Let me know how the meeting goes. »> Lori Rosenstein 08/14/03 09:14AM »> Colleen, I don't know if you are the person doing the inspection on the new ANA Dormitory, but Brenda suggested I start with you. If you aren't doing the inspection, please forward this to the appropriate person. ANA Is requesting a temporary CofO to get the dormitory open prior to the school starting in Sept. Can you please give me an update on outstanding Flre related issues? Paul York and I are meeting with the representatives this morning to get a list of times for additional Items to be completed. The decision to issue the temporary CofO will not be made until we consult with you, Pat Kelley, and Debbie Fountain. Thank you! Lori TJ m CM (0 Q. o •c I ? ? ^ 1 ^ 1^ b 2 o £ ,^ ^ QL — TJ 8 I o E \> CO To :S W 8 TJ S O I I CO o O CO o o S5 CO o < CO o O CM CO O O 3 < CM CO o O i 3 CO o O 3 S5 CO o O 3 CO o O 3 CO o O 3 < CO o O 3 J o £ <l> TJ S o 8 2 QL E s 8 8 8 o 8 I s o 8 (A i O J o o o t)0 J or 0^ (/) Lori Rosenstein -,Re: Army & Navy Academy Dormitory Page 1 From: Colleen Balch To: Lori Rosenstein Date: 8/14/03 3:45PM Subject: Re: Army & Navy Academy Dormitory Thank you for the info. I had forgotten about the additional hydrant, that would also have to be operational. I am not inclined to let them occupy without all the life safety Issues done. »> Lorl Rosenstein 08/14/03 11:52AM »> Paul York and I met with ANA this morning to discuss their completion schedule for the dormitory. They have run into a problem while tying into the City's water line that has Impacted their schedule slightly. They found a leak in the City's water main that has forced them to tie Into a new location across Pacific Avenue. This forces the temporary closure of Pacific for a few days (Tues. thru Fri. of next week). All neighbors will be notified. They have stated they have 95% of their fire alarm system completed and the flre sprinkler system is expected to be completed tomorrow, but they are still 1 1/2 weeks out for testing while they wait for the new water line to be completed. Overall, ANA feels they will have all life-safety Issues completed by Sept. 5th when they would like to receive a temporary CofO so the cadets can move in on Sept. 6th. The outstanding items at that time will include final completion of the garden wall/fence and final landscaping on Pacific. According to their schedule, by the end of August, they will have the footings for the garden wall dug and poured the installation of the block will be initiated. The wall will be completed by Sept 16th when the wrought iron fence and gate will be installed. Irrigation and landscaping of the north side of the building is expected to be completed by Oct. 2nd. Overall, they would be looking for a 30 day temporary CofO. The question for all of you is do you support the issuance of the temporary CofO if they are able to stick to the time schedule presented here? If we are not going to support the temporary CofO I need to let ANA know asap so they can make other arrangements for the cadets. Thank you for your input. Lori Rosenstein - Re: Army & Navy AcadenakDormitory Page 1 From: Debbie Fountain To: Colleen Balch; Lori Rosenstein; Pat Kelley Date: 8/14/03 5:30PM Subject: Re: Army & Navy Academy Dormitory Hi Lori. I have concern about letting the cadets move in If there are any Issues at all with the interior of the building. However, if the only outstanding issues are the fence and the landscaping, I would be OK with a temporary C of 0. We better make sure it is clear, however, that if they don't finish the wall and landscaping by the date noted that they are going to be In considerable hot water. So, they had better not let us down! »> Lori Rosenstein 08/14/03 11:52AM »> Paul York and I met with ANA this morning to discuss their completion schedule for the dormitory. They have run into a problem while tying into the City's water line that has impacted their schedule slightly. They found a leak in the City's water main that has forced them to tie into a new location across Pacific Avenue. This forces the temporary closure of Pacific for a few days (Tues. thru Fri. of next week). All neighbors will be notified. They have stated they have 95% of their flre alarm system completed and the fire sprinkler system is expected to be completed tomorrow, but they are still 1 1/2 weeks out for testing while they wait for the new water line to be completed. Overall, ANA feels they will have all life-safety Issues completed by Sept. 5th when they would like to receive a temporary CofO so the cadets can move in on SepL 6th. The outstanding items at that time will include final completion of the garden wall/fence and final landscaping on Pacific. According to their schedule, by the end of August, they will have the footings for the garden wall dug and poured the installation of the block will be initiated. The wall will be completed by Sept 16th when the wrought iron fence and gate will be installed. Irrigation and landscaping of the north side of the building is expected to be completed by Oct. 2nd. Overall, they would be looking for a 30 day temporary CofO. The question for all of you is do you support the Issuance of the temporary CofO if they are able to stick to the time schedule presented here? If we are not going to support the temporary CofO I need to let ANA know asap so they can make other arrangements for the cadets. Thank you for your input. Lori Rq^ensteln - Re: ANA Storage Contai Page 1 From: Debbie Fountain To: Lori Rosenstein Date: 8/14/03 5:35PM Subject: Re: ANA Storage Container Hi Lori. I am OK with leaving it in the parking lot for now, unless there are any issues with it from your standpoint. »> Lori Rosenstein 08/14/03 11:58AM »> On a separate note, ANA has a 8' x 20' storage container in the Mountain View parking lot that they would like to keep temporarily, because it contains the windows that were removed from the dormitory that are now the subject of litigation. They would like to remove the container, because they no longer want to pay for the rental, but have been Instructred by their legal counsel that they must keep the windows until the lawsuit is resolved. This could take awhile. I asked Roger if there was a better location for the container and he said he can put it where the construction trailer is now, but that is more visible on Pacific Avenue. What should I tell them? Citv oftarlsbad FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL DATE: 11/01/99 TIME SENT: 5:00 p.m. No. of pages transmitted (including fax transmittal paqe): 5 No. of pages transmitted (including fax transmittal paqe): 5 TO: Robert Morales FROM: Lori Rosenstein COMPANY: tBP Architecture DEPT: HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT PHONE: (949) 673-0300 FAX: (949) 673-9267 PHONE #: (760) 434- 2813 FAX#: (760)720-2037 E-MAIL #: lrose@ci.carisbad.ca.us Robert: I have included a copy of the letter identifying additional information needed to fmd the Army and Navy Academy application complete. The original has been sent via postal service. Call me if you have any questions. This written message is for the exclusive use of the addressee and may contain confldential, privileged, and non-disclosable information. If the recipient of this message is not the addressee, or a person responsible for delivering the message to the addressee, then the recipient is prohibited from reading or using this message in any way. If you have received this message by mistake, please call us immediately and destroy the telecopy message. Housing & Redevelopment Department • 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B • Carlsbad, California 92008 Citv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department October 29, 1999 ROBERT MORALES TBP ARCHITECTURE 2300 NEWPORT BLVD NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 SUBJECT: ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY (RP99-14/CDP99-49) 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. RP 99-11, and Coastal Development Permit, application no. CDP 99-49, as to their completeness for processing. The applications are incomplete, as submitted. The attached list includes information which must be submitted to complete your application. This list of items must be submitted directly to the 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 application is determined to be complete. When ail required materials are submitted to the Redevelopment Office, the City has an additional thirty (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, September 29, 1999, 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, LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst c: Mike Shirey, Engineering Department Mike Grim, Planning Department Kelly Efimoff, Carlsbad Municipal Water District Mike Smith, Fire Department 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. RP99-14/CDP99-49 Engineenng: Engineering Department staff have completed a review of the above-referenced project for application 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: 1. In general, the plans need to be brought up to site plan submittal quality. These plans are acceptable for an overview of the entire project site. But since the applicant is proposing actual construction of buildings, the plans must be able to be reviewed for actual engineering issues of concern. To accomplish this, the plans must have a design element to them. They do not have to be full construction improvement drawings, but they do need to be much more than hand drafted schematics. So, at a minimum, areas that are being submitted for actual entitlement must be submitted as design quality plans for staff to be able to adequately review them. 2. Please indicate the project's Average Daily Traffic (ADT) per San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) criteria. 3. Please submit the project on standard 24" x 36" plan sheets. Use match/cut lines if necessary. 4. Please indicate discretionary applications RP 99-14 and CDP 99-49 on the site plan. 5. The easement information that was submitted is from the 1996 submittal. This information must be updated in accordance with the current Preliminary Title Report (PR). Additionally, in 1996, the format that this information was submitted in was acceptable because nothing was being constructed. Now that actual buildings are being proposed, this information must be more clearly shown (See Issue No. 1 above). 6. Please clearly show all existing and proposed street light standards and fire hydrants. 7. Existing topography, vegetation, structures, etc., and proposed grading contours must be clearly shown. 8. Grading quantities must be more cleariy indicated. For example, what is the row iQdicated as "Whole Project" representing? 9. Please show spot elevations, finished grade, and finished floor elevations. 10. Please indicate existing and proposed on-site drainage patterns. 11. Please label the 100-year flood line and/or wave run-up elevations. Provide a hydrology report regarding this information. 12. If traffic volumes are over 500 ADT, please submit a traffic study. 13. Please submit a preliminary soils report. 14. Please be advised, depending on how the applicant wishes to process this application, some of the above information may not be required. However, if the existing Master Plan and Phasing plan are being amended, then this information must be submitted. Items Needed to Complete App[i((|P[>n RP99-14/C0P99-49 Page 2 15. For the above reasons, engineering issues of concern could not be addressed. Engineering issues will be reviewed once the above information is submitted and the application is deemed complete. Housing & Redevelopment: The Housing and Redevelopment Department has completed its review of the subject project for application completeness. The application and plans submitted for this project are incomplete and unsuitable for further review due to the following missing or incomplete items: Additional fees must be submitted for the Coastal Development Permit. The additional fee amount is $400. ^jft^The property owner's signature is required on page 2 of the Land Use Review Application #24. ^jl^ The property owner must complete #4 of the Disclosure Statement. ^^The applicant must complete #1 of the Disclosure Statement. (^j^The applicant's signature is required on page 2 of the Disclosure Statement. ^^Ljnclude date of preparation and revisions on all plans. ^ l^t^^''^^- Reference project application numbers {RP99-14 and CDP99-49) on site plan and ^'^^{j^A^ project data sheet. (3t>-On project data sheet, show City of Carisbad as sewer district providing service to the site. orrect spelling of Crean Hall under proposed campus data. 10. Site plan must Include the following: • Location of all permanent structures within 100' of site; • Setback dimensions for required front, rear, and side yards for three new ^ dormitories; • Bearings and distance of each exterior boundary line; • Distance between buildings and/or structures; Building floor plans should include a chart with the square footage of the various rooms. ^L/Any existing plans that were part of the original Master Plan, but do not include proposed changes should not be attached at this time. ^ 1 Amendment to Architectural Design Guidelines should include the following: ^_ • An introductory paragraph stating the purpose and intent of the amendment. . • How the amendment seeks to modify the existing design guidelines (identify the ^3^c^ most significant changes to the existing guidelines). Items Needed to Complete Applic RP99-14/C0P99-49 Page 3 • Building Form and Massing: clarify if doors and windows are to be deep set or "slightly recessed". This appears to be a discrepancy between existing design guidelines and the proposed amendment. • Specific examples are needed under Building Form and Massing and Scale, Rhythm and Proportion. • Roof Forms: Clarify if parapeted flat roof forms are still acceptable. • Window: Clarify is windows are to be recessed or not; Clarify if mullions are to be encouraged or not; Specify types and colors of acceptable window frames. • Openings: Clarify if upper levels are still encouraged to be stepped back and reduced in size. • In general, it is not clear if the only elements of the existing design guidelines that are to be amended are those identified in the Amendment to Architectural Design Guidelines. Additional detail is needed to show the relationship between the existing design guidelines and the proposed amendment. Pianning: The Planning Department has completed its review of the subject project for application completeness. The application and plans submitted for this project are incomplete and unsuitable for further review because more complete and legible plans are needed to review the development project. In addition, a complete and accurate project description is requested identifying what it is the Academy seeks to accomplish with this submittal. Project description should include proposed timing on the current phase of the project. CITY OF CARLSBAD LAND USE REVIEW APPLICATION 1) APPLICATIONS APPLIED FOR: (CHECK BOXES) (FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY) • Administrative Permit - 2nd Dwelling Unit • Planned Industrial Permit • Administrative Variance • Planning Commission Determination Coastal Development Permit COP ^'^•Mq • Precise Development Plan • Conditional Use Permit Redevelopment Permit • Condominium Permit • Site Development Plan • Environmental Impact Assessment • Special Use Permit • General Plan Amendment • Specific Plan • Hillside Development Permit • TcntativG Paroel Mop Obtain from Engineering Department • Local Coastal Plan Amendment • Tentative Tract Map Master Plan • Variance • Non-Residentiai Planned Deveiopment • Zone Change • Planned Development Permit • List other applications not soecified (FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY) 203-041-01 Z) ASSESSOR PARCEL NO{S).: 3) PROJECT NAME: \) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: New Dormitory Buildings. Parking, and Street. Tmprnvpmpntc: Army and Navy Academy Improvement<; ) OWNER NAME (Print or Type) Army and Navy Academy 6) APPLICANT NAME (Print or Type) teP/Architecture /lAlLING ADDRESS 2605 Carlsbad Blvd. MAILING ADDRESS 2300 Newport Blvd. :ITY AND STATE- ZIP TELEPHONE Garlsbad, CA 92018 (760) 729-2385 CtTY AND STATE ZIP TELEPHONE Newport Beach, CA 92663 . (949) 673-0300 CERTIFY THAT 1 AM THE LEGAL OWNER AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE IFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY >JpWLEDGE. ^ - (fihJJ^ £>j fg 1 CERTIFY THAT 1 AM THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OWNER AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. IGNATURE DATE SIGN^URE D^^TE ^ BRIEF LEGAL DESCRIPTION Parcels A.R.C.n.F.y ^ n of Grandville Park in thp. Cify nf Carlsbad. OTE: A PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING IVIULTIPLE APPLICATIONS BE FILED, MUST BE SUBIVIITTED PRIOR TO 3:30 P.M. PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING ONLY ONE APPUCATION BE FILED, MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO 4:00 P.M. orm 1 6 PAGE 1 OF 2 8) LOCATION OF PROJECT: ON THE BETWEEN 2605 Carlsbad Blvd., Carlsbad West STREET ADDRESS SIDE OF Carlsbad Blvd. (NORTH, SOUTH, EAST, WEST) (NAME OF STREET) Mountain View Dr. AND (NAME OF STREET) 9) LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 1 0) PROPOSED NUMBER OF LOTS No. 1 N/A 1 3) TYPE OF SUBDIVISION 1 6) PERCENTAGE OF PROPOSED PROJECT IN OPEN SPACE 1 9) GROSS SITE ACREAGE 22) EXISTiNG ZONING N/A 80% 15.98 VR 11) NUMBER OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL UNITS 14) PROPOSED IND OFFICE/ SQUARE FOOTAGE 1 7) PROPOSED INCREASE IN ADT 20) EXISTING GENERAL PLAN 23) PROPOSED ZONING Cypress Ave. 296 N/A VR (NAME OF STREET) 1 2) PROPOSED NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS 1 5) PROPOSED COMM SQUARE FOOTAGE 18) PROPOSED SEWER USAGE IN EDU 21) PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATiON 320 N/A 24) IN THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING THIS APPLICATION IT MAY BE NECESSARY FOR MEMBERS OF CITY STAFF, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEMEBERS OR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO INSPECT AND ENTER THE PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS APPLICATION. I/WE CONSENT TO ENTRY FOR THIS PURPOSE SIGNATURE FOR CITY USE ONLY FEE COMPUTATION APPLICATION TYPE FEE REQUIRED TOTAL FEE REQUIRED RECEiVED SEP 2 9 1999 CiTY OF CARLSSAD DATE Jrki^l^PifiS^^^ii^JecEivED RECEIVED BY: DATE FEE PAID RECEIPT NO. gOQO(o1 (gS Form 16 PAGE 2 OF 2 City of Carlsbad Planning Department DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Applicant's statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all appiications which will require discretionary action on the part ofthe City Council or any appointed Board, Commission or Comminee. The following information MUST be disclosed at the time of application subminal. Your projeci cannot be reviewed until this information is completed. Please print. Note: Person is defined as "Any individuaL finn, co-partnership, joint venture, association, sociai club, fraternal organizalion, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, in this and any other county, cirv- and count)-, cir\ municipality, district or other political subdivision or any other group or combination acting as a unit." Agents may sign this document; however, the legal name and entity of the applicant and property o^\'ner must be provided below. 1. APPLICANT (Not the applicant's agent) Provide the COMPLETE, LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having a financial interest in the application. If the applicant includes a corporation or partnership, include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON- APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a pubiiclv-owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessan.'.) Person Corp/Part Title Title Address Address OWNER (Not the owner's agent) Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. Also, provide the nature of the legal ownership (i.e, partnership, tenants in common, non-profit, corporation, etc.). If the ownership includes a corporation or pannership. include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% ofthe shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publiclv- owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate' page may be attached if necessary.) Person Corp/Part Non-Profit Title Titie Armv & Navy Academy Address Address 2605 Carlsbad Blvd., Carlsbad, CA, 2075 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad. CA 92009-1576 • (760) 438-1161 • FAX (760) 438-0894 NON-PROFTT q^ANIZATION OR TRUST If any person identmed pursuant to (I) or (2) above is a nonprofit organizarion or a trust, list the names and addresses of ANY person serving as an officer or director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary of the. Non Profit/Trust Steven Miller Title President Non Profit/Trust. Title Address 2605 Carlsbad Blvd., Carl sbadAddress CA Have you had more than S250 worth of business transacted with any member of Cit\ staff. Boards. Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) months? I I Yes No If yes, please indicate person(s):. NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary. i certify that all the above infonnation is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Signature of applicant/date Steven Miller Print or type name of owner Print or type name of applicant Signalure of owner/applicant's agent if applicable/date Print or type name of owner/applicant's agent H:ADMIN\COUNTER\DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 5/98 Page 2 of 2 PROJECT NAME: APPLICANT NAME: RECEIVED PROJECT DESCRIPTION/EXPLANATiON FEB 1 0 2000 Revised February 3, 2000 Army and Navy Academy Dormitory Buiidings, Parking and Street Improvements Please describe fuliy the proposed project. Include any details necessary to adequately explain the scope and/or operation of the proposed project. You may also include any background information and supporting statements regarding the reasons for, or appropriateness of, the application. Use an addendum sheet if necessary. Description/Explanation: Proposed Buildings: Proposed Phase Parking: Subtotal Subtotal 80 Bed Student Dormitory, Building 3 A (Phase 1) 64 Bed Student Dormitory, Building 4 (Phase 3) 80 Bed Student Dormitory, Building 3B (Phase 8) 25 On-site Parking Spaces (Existing) 48 On-site Parking Spaces (Phase 1) 73 Parking Spaces -25 Demolish Spaces (Phase 7) 48 Parking Spaces 65 On-site Parking Spaces (Phase 9) Total Parking Spaces: 136 On-site Parking Spaces (Final Build-out) Proposed Master Plan Amendments: 1. Amendment to the Design Guidelines 2. Amendment to the Phasing Schedule 3. Revise number of "housed" students in on-site dormitories from 304 to 320 students at Master Plan "build-ouf. FAX Memorandum Architecture Planmng Interiors Management Date: 03/13/00 To: City of Carlsbad, Housing and Redevelopment 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B Carlsbad, CA 92008 Attn: Lori Rosenstein, Management Analyst FAX: 760/720-2037 Proj: Army and Navy Academy Site and Street Improvements Proj No.: 99014.00 From: Robert Morales, tBP/Architecture cc: Col. Stephen Miller, Army and Navy Academy, fax 760-720-7121 Anthony DePaola, tBP/Architecture RECEIVED MAR 14 2000 HOUSKKPVNT DEPARTMENT ' Message/Memo: As discussed, attached are three (3) pages with dormitory bed count lists for Phase 1, Phase 3, and Phase 8 of the Master Plan. These pages are added to the Academy's submittal. I have mailed you originals of each page for your records. Please do not hesitate to call me with any comments or questions at 949/673-0300. tBP/Architecture 2300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA. 92663 ph: 949 673 0300 fax: 949 673 9267 Army and Navy Academy tBP P/N 99014.00 March 13, 2000 Phase 1 Campus Master Plan Dormitory Bed Count per Phase Building # Existing Beds # Proposed Beds Total Beds Dormitories Proposed Building 0 80 80 Hoover Hal! (demo 2 rooms) 24 -4 20 McClendon Hall (demo 2 rooms 24 -4 20 Dorman Hall (fire damaged) 28 -28 0 Lewis Hall 16 0 16 Mcintosh Hall 16 0 16 Atkinson Hall 32 0 32 Crean Hall 64 0 64 Anderson Hall 24 0 24 Cottage 1 8 0 8 Cottage 2 8 0 8 Cottage 3 8 0 8 Cottage 4 8 0 8 Cottage 5 8 0 8 Cottage 6 8 0 8 Cottage 7 8 0 8 TOTALS 284 44 328 Army and Navy Academy tBP P/N 99014.00 March 13, 2000 Phase 3 Campus Master Plan Dormitory Bed Count per Phase Building # Existing Beds # Proposed Beds Total Beds Dormitories Proposed Building 0 64 64 Phase 1 Building 80 0 80 Hoover Hall 20 0 20 McClendon Hall 20 0 20 Lewis Hall 16 0 16 Mcintosh Hall 16 0 16 Atkinson Hall 32 0 32 Crean Hall 64 0 64 Anderson Hall (Ph. 2 demo) 24 -24 0 Cottage 1 (Ph. 2 demo) 8 -8 0 Cottage 2 (Ph. 2 demo) 8 -8 0 Cottage 3 (Ph. 2 demo) 8 -8 0 Cottage 4 (Ph. 2 demo) 8 -8 0 Cottage 5 OPh. 2 demo) 8 -8 0 Cottage 6 (Ph. 2 demo) 8 0 8 Cottage 7 (Ph. 2 demo) 8 0 8 TOTALS 328 0 328 Army and Navy Academy tBP P/N 99014.00 March 13, 2000 Phase 8 Campus Master Plan Dormitory Bed Count per Phase Building U Existing Beds # Proposed Beds Total Beds Dormitories Proposed Building 0 80 80 Phase 1 Building 80 0 80 Phase 3 Building 64 0 64 Hoover Hall (demo) 20 -20 0 McClendon Hall (demo) 20 -20 0 Lewis Hall (demo) 16 -16 0 Mcintosh Hall (demo) 16 -16 0 Atkinson Hall (demo) 32 0 32 Crean Hall (demo) 64 0 64 Cottage 6 (demo) 8 -8 0 Cottage 7 (demo) 8 -8 0 TOTALS 328 -8 320 Citv oftarlsbad FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL DATE: 3/31/00 TIME SENT: 4:30 D.m. No. of pages transmitted (inciudina fax transmittal paqe): 7 No. of pages transmitted (inciudina fax transmittal paqe): 7 TO: Robert Morales FROM: Lorl Rosenstein COMPANY: tBP Architecture DEPT: HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT PHONE: (949) 673-0300 FAX: (949) 673-9267 PHONE #: (760) 434- 2813 FAX#: (760)720-2037 E-MAIL #: lrose(gci.carisbad.ca.us Robert: I have attached the latest comments on the last submittal for the Army & Navy Academy. We need to talk to discuss a possible meeting date next week. Some of our team members have a conflict with the late moming you suggested for Tuesday, April 4th. please call me to schedule a new meeting time. This written message is for the exclusive use of the addressee and may contain confidential, privileged, and non-disclosable information. If the recipient of this message is not the addressee, or a person responsible for delivering the message to the addressee, then the recipient is prohibited from reading or using this message in any way. If you have received this message by mistake, please call us immediately and destroy the telecopy message. Housing & Redevelopment Department • 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B • Carlsbad, California 92008 Citv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department March 31, 2000 ROBERT MORALES TBP ARCHITECTURE 2300 NEWPORT BLVD NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 SUBJECT: ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY (RP99-14/CDP99-49) On February 10, 2000 the Housing and Redevelopment Department received the revised project plans and corresponding project information requested by City of Carisbad in our letter to you dated October 31, 1999. At the time the plans were resubmitted, I discussed with you the fact that the dormitory bed counts shown for each phase were incorrect and you modified the plans accordingly while you were in my office. At the same time you said that you would be sending me revised bed counts for each of the three phases showing consistency with the Master Plan. In anticipation of this additional information I held off on distributing the revised plans to the other City Departments. After a week and a half I distributed the plans and let the other City Departments know additional information was forthcoming. I received the revised bed counts for each phase on March 14, 2000 and immediately distributed this information to the appropriate departments. I also met with staff members from both the Planning and Engineering Departments to discuss the revised plans. It was the generai consensus of the group that the plans are very confusing because so much information is being conveyed. As a resuit, the project itself is becoming very complicated. It was suggested by those staff members present, that we meet with you and your client to discuss the information that is required for this project to be taken forward to the Housing and Redevelopment Commission for action. The purpose of the meeting is twofold. First, we would like to discuss the timing of the project and the revisions to the phasing of the public improvements. It was my understanding when we started this project that construction of the., dormitory to replace the housing that was destroyed in the fire was of utmost importance -fo the Army and Navy Academy. The land use permit for that building alone should not be a complicated task. However, two more dormitories have been added to the project and the phasing plan and design guidelines for the Master Plan must be revised to accommodate the new dormitories. While all of these things can be accomplished in the redevelopment permit application, I am concerned that your client has a different understanding of the timing associated with the processing of the land use permit based on the original scope of the project. Additionally, I think it is important to discuss the phasing of the public improvements and undergrounding of utilities for the site which will have to be revised to correspond with the current scope of the project. Following the review of the resubmitted plans, staff finds that all of the items requested of you eariier have not been received or are unsuitable for further processing and therefore your application is still deemed incomplete. Listed below are the item(s) still needed in 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 Army & Navy Academy March 31, 2000 Page 2 order to deem your application as complete. This list of items must be submitted directly to the Housing and Redevelopment Department. 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 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. Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813 to schedule an appointment with City staff to further discuss the issues raised in this letter. Sincerely, LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst Attachment c: Mike Shirey, Engineering Department Mike Grim, Planning Department Bill Plummer, Carisbad Municipal Water District Mike Smith, Fire Department Pat Kelley, Building Department LIST OF ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION No. RP99-14/CDP99-49 Engineering: Engineering Department staff have completed a second review of the above-referenced project for application completeness and have determined that the application and plans submitted for the project are still incomplete and unsuitable for continued review due to the following incomplete items: 1. As previously indicated, in general, the plans need to be brought up to site plan submittal quality. These plans are acceptable for an overview of the entire project site. But since the applicant is proposing actual construction of buildings, the plans must be able to be reviewed for engineering issues of concern. To accomplish this, the plans must have a design element to them. They do not have to be full construction improvement drawings, but they do need more legible detail. The applicant did suppIv additional information on the existinq plan sheets, but there is still not enough detail to enable standard enqineering review. For example, sheet AS-3 indicates, "'drainage structure through/below stairs to swale." Engineering staff must be able to actuallv review a design parameter like this, rather than iust reading a note. So, at a minimum, areas that are being submitted for actual entitlement must be submitted as design quality plans, at a 1" = 20' or 40' scale, for staff to be able to adequately review them. 2. As previously requested, please indicate the project's Average Daily Traffic (ADT) per San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) criteria. Submitting a letter stating that there is no increase in ADT may be acceptable, but the ADT still must be indicated on the actual site plan. Since this is a Master Plan (MP) amendment, and a traffic report was conducted with the original MP, a letter submitted from the previous traffic engineer indicating that there are no changes, or that there is less traffic than was generated for the previous MP, will be acceptable. The letter should reference the previous traffic report, and a copy of the previous report should be submitted. 3. As previously requested, please indicate discretionary review applications RP 99-14 and CDP 99-49 on the site plan. (The applicants re-submittal letter stated that this information was indicated in the Phase 1, 3 & 8 "title block," however staff could not locate it.) Additionally, this information should be indicated on every sheet of the site plan, not just certain individual sheets. » 4. As previously indicated, the easement information that was shown as part of the first check was from the 1996 submittal. This time, the easement information shown was from a Preliminarv Title Report (PR) dated Januarv 10, 1994. The information that needs to be shown is from the PR that was submitted with the original 1999 project dated August 11, 1999. Also, the 1994 PR was copied onto a plan sheet (sheet C-2). This is unnecessary. Therefore, what needs to be done is, fully and accurately plot the easements on the site plan, and, show each easement's recording information, from the 1999 PR, either in an easement table with corresponding numbers next to the easement, or, at each easement, in plan view. 5. Thank you for showing the existing fire hydrant locations. However, as previously requested, proposed street light standards still need to be shown (as well as proposed improvements). Items Needed to Compiete Application RP99-14/CDP99-49 Page 2 6. As previously requested, existing topography and structures and proposed grading contours must be cleariy shown. For example, the existing campus plan is incorrect. It already shows the Phase 1 improvements, instead of the modular buildings. Also, there are no elevations indicated on the contour lines on the existing campus plan. On sheet AS-3, handwritten spot elevations have been shown around the Phase 1 building, all at an elevation of 50.84'. How is this area supposed to drain? Are the numerous numbers, located on the Phase 1 site plan (sheet AS-3), spot elevations? Also one arrow labeled "drainage" is insufficient to show actual drainage patterns for the site. Please see Issue No. 1 above, regarding plan preparation. 7. Please provide documentation that the project architect/engineer is coordinating with City design consulting engineer, Doug Helming, of Helming Engineering, Inc., regarding the Army/Navy Mountain View improvements and the City's Carisbad Boulevard street and bridge improvements. Design information for the Carisbad Boulevard improvements must be shown on the site plan. 8. Even though the applicant is amending the MP, hydrology information does not have to be submitted or shown on the plans at this time. However, hydrology information will be required when an application for discretionary review for the property located on the west side of Ocean Street (proposed Phase 4) is processed. 9. For the above reasons, specific engineering issues of concern still could not be addressed. Engineering issues will be reviewed once the above information is submitted and the application is deemed complete. However, so that the project can keep moving forward, and as a courtesy to the applicant, the following is a major issue that should be looked at and worked on now. Maior Issue of Concern 1. The approved Phasing Plan, and project Conditions of Approval, require the developer to install street improvements (including under-grounding of overhead utilities) concurrent with any development. The current proposal indicates that the installation of street improvements does not occur until Phase 3. This proposal does;'not meet City Code and is not in accordance with what was previously agreed to with the Army/Navy Academy (as indicated by the previous Engineering Conditions of Approval), and therefore, cannot be supported by staff. Street improvements must be installed concurrent with any development. Since the first phase of development is along Pacific Avenue, the improvement requirement is to improve all of Pacific Avenue (including under-grounding of overhead utilities) along with any requisite transitions. This is a standard improvement requirement, in accordance with City Code, and again, must be completed concurrent with development. Subsequent phasing will also have to include street improvements along the street where the development is proposed. Additionally, the improvements must be shown on the site plan, in plan and typical section views. Items Needed to Complete Application RP99-14/CDP99-49 Page 3 Engineering staff suggests that the applicant set-up a meeting with redevelopment, and include planning and engineering, to discuss all of the project completeness and plan preparation issues in one setting. Engineering staff will make themselves available for any meeting. Housing & Redevelopment: The Housing and Redevelopment Department has completed its second review of the subject project for application completeness. The following changes are suggested to make the plans more readable and clarify some issues: 1. To make the site plan more readable please remove all underlying information or place on a separate sheet. The site plan need only contain the required information outlined on the original checklist. 2. Amendment to Architectural Design Guidelines should include a statement clarifying if the amended guidelines completely replace the original guidelines or only amend those sections addressed in the amendment. A single document is strongly encouraged to avoid confusion in the future. Carlsbad Municipal Water Distnct: Comments received by the Carisbad Municipal Water District are as follows: "From our review of the submitted documents, no public facilities are proposed to serve the new dormitories. Therefore, CMWD has no comments on the subject project. If a new water service or sewer lateral is proposed and not shown, CMWD will comment on the new connections." Fire Department: Comments received by the Fire Department are as follows: 1. All proposed new buildings exceeding 10,000 square feet in area must be protected by an automatic fire sprinkler system. 2. Per the Carlsbad Municipal Code, automatic fire sprinklers must be installed throughout an existing building if the area of that building is increased, aVid the building area resulting from that increase exceeds 10,000 square feet. 3. Details of proposed building areas, emergency access, building set-backs, dimensions, and other important architectural details are not clear. 4. Additional emergency access and fire hydrants will be required. Building Department: Comments received by the Building Department are as follows: The plans are somewhat vague as to content, so these comments should not be construed as complete building department plan review comments. Items Needed to Comj^e Application RP99-14/CDP99-49 Page 4 Phase 1 1. The proposed new parking lot on the east side of Mountain View needs handicapped accessible space(s). 2. Remodeled Existing Admin. & Cafeteria BIdg will require a building permit. This remodel will trigger access upgrades to this structure as well (residential to office use). Plans do not have detailing, so further comments are not possible. 3. It appears that a partial demolition of one existing dorm room is being proposed to fit a new building on the site. This partially demolished structure should be analyzed and the applicant will be required to secure a permit for modifying this structure. 4. New dorm building must meet handicap standards for "covered multi-family dwellings" per State Building Code Chapter IIA. It does not appear the building is served by an accessible ramp. The structure does not appear to include sanitary facilities that are handicap accessible, but the detailing is again vague. 5. It should be cleariy noted that the temporary modulars come out on this phase. Part of the footprint of these temporary buildings is outside the dotted line on AS-3. Phase 3 1. Ramp access to new dorm is not shown. 2. Plan shows a retaining wall at the foundation of an existing building. This requires an engineering analysis and a separate building permit for modifying that structure. 3. Planning recently changed the definition of basement in the zone code. Not sure now if the phase 3 dorm qualifies as a basement building or a three story building. 4. Multi-purpose room in basement presents an exiting challenge at least. No exits are shown on the plan. * 5. This structure is again a "covered multi-family dwelling" and an elevator building. In fact, inclusion of the elevator and the bridges connecting the other dorms to this building , makes all the other upper floors of the new dorms "covered" by access regulations. # itv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department April 12, 2000 ROBERT MORALES TBP ARCHITECTURE 2300 NEWPORT BLVD NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 SUBJECT: ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY (RP99-14/CDP99-49) This letter is intended as a follow-up to my last letter, dated March 31, 2000, containing items needed to complete the major redevelopment permit application and issues of concern. The following constitute the latest comments received from the Carlsbad Municipal Water District following their review of the plans dated February 10, 2000: 1. The project shall be planned to use recycled water for on-site irrigation. 2. Two new water meters and services shall be required, one for potable water to the buildings and one for the irrigation system. 3. Improvements to Mountain View Drive: a. Relocation of existing water appurtenances are required. b. Existing water pipeline may need to be relocated and the size increased depending on fire flow requirements. c. Sewer laterals may need to be installed for buildings to receive sewer service. d. A new sewer access hole is required depending on sewer lateral size and locations. If you have any questions regarding the comments contained in this letter please contact either Bill Plummer of the Carisbad Municipal Water District at (760) 438-2722 or my office at (760) 434-2813. Sincerely, LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst c: Mike Shirey, Engineering Department Mike Grim, Planning Department Bill Plummer, Carisbad Municipal Water District Mike Smith, Fire Department Pat Kelley, Building Department 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 DATE: TO: ATTN.: FROM: PROJECT- SUBJECT: CUENT REF. GLP (fP'jald Associates, Inc. Consulting Electrical Engineers May 8, 2000 tBP Architecture Tony DePaola Joel Brandts RECEIVED JUN 26 2000 CITYOF CARLSBAD HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FAX MEMO Page 1 of 2 ELECTRICAL MASTER PLAN FOR ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY CARLSBAD, OA UNDERGROUNDING OF ELECTRICAL UTILITIES ON PACIFIC AVENUE 99046 GLPKNC: 00010 1. Our 5-4-00 Meeting with San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E) w/as both enlightening and productivve. Don Aitevers, Customer Project Planner for SDG&E, helped clarify a number of considerations as weii as the magnitude of work (both in design and construction) involved in changing the existing overhead utilities to underground. Street improvements on Pacific Avenue will be included with the upcoming construction of the Donnitory Building. We informed SDG&E of the City's desire to underground the utilities with these street improvements. SDG&E pointed out the foilowing: The existing utility poles serve the residential properties on the north side of Pacific Avenue, At the present time, these properties do not have facijities for underground services. If the utility lines were to go undergound at this time, utility poles would have to be added along the north side of Pacific Avenue to accommodate these existing sen/Ices, SDG&E requires a reasonable amount of time to design an underground distribution system (they need 8 to 10 weeks to design the Dormitory Building's services exclusive of any street improvements). SDG&E explained that the existing utility poles include not only primary distribution lines, but transformers, capacitors, switches, etc., (as well as telephone and CATV lines). All this hardware must be considered and redistributed, SDG&E can not design an underground distribution system that wili facilitate the Army and Navy Academy's future until the Army and Navy's Eiectrical Master Plan has progressed further (it is our understanding thatthe Eiectrical Master Plan will commence later this year). The Electrical Master Plan is a large, lengthy endeavor that Includes the following: a. As-built Phase i. Site visits to review existing conditions, ii. Meetings with the Owner's representative to verify specific as-built conditions. 3185-C Airway Avenue • Costa Mesa. OA 92626-4601 Phone: (714) 751-1851 • Fax: (714)751-4216 •> Email: files@glpk.com GLP t^jala Associates, Inc. Consulting Electrical Engineers FAX MEMO Page 2 of 2 iii. Electrical drawings including the following: (1) Site as-built electrical plans showing the existing power, fire alarm, telephone and other systems cn campus. (2) Site eiectrical load calculations based upon the overall campus Master Plan, iv. Time Frame: Two to three weeks from date of authorization to proceed. b. Repon Phase i. Attend meetings with Architect and Owner to determine Master Plan priorities. ii. Review Architect's Master Plan buiiding layout, iii. Meet and coordinate with San Diego Gas & Electric to determine incoming service options for the different areas of the campus. iv. Eiectrical drawings inciuding the following: (1) Preparation of Electrical Master Plan schematic drawings in 11" x 17" format. (2) Preparation of written Master Plan Report in 8 1/2" x 11" format (3) Drawings, sketches and studies for the various options around the campus for supplying power and signal systems for the present and future buiidings, v. Time Frame: Three to four weeks from date of completion of as-built phase. As the various considerations and timeframes were discussed, it became increasingly more apparent that the existing utility poles on Pacific Avenue should be relocated to facilitate the street improvements for the Dormitory Building (in lieu of the utilities going underground). The Eiectricai Master Pian wiil include consolidation of the Army and Navy's electrical services and undergrounding of eiectrical utilities. Please call v\/ith any questions and/or comments. -END- H:\WP\ProjactS\OOOlO Army 1 Navy, Dofmuap.508.flO.vwpd 3185-C AinA/ay Avenue • Costa Mesa, CA 92626-4601 Phone: (714) 751-1851 • Fax: (714)751-4216 • Emaii: files@qlpk.com V - TO: ATTN: MAY 12 2000 GLPKaiiala GLP lOg^ia Associates, Inc. Cmsulting Electrical Engineers Pag© 1 of ]^ (Irlcfudes This Page) DSSCRiPTCOlM: COMA^TS PRpJSCT: ^^S/^ T FAX: (714)7^1-4216 3ll85-C Airway A>Jenqe - Costa Mesa. CjA 92628-4601 • (714) 75l-ii951 OK. CA. RacaivBd litey-lZ-OD 08:505a Fronr TQTRL P.01 To-GLP KARJALA ASSOC, Pais 81 Sent by:RKJK Jun-23-00 07:07ap< fron 9494740902>9496730300 page 2/ 3 RKJK & ASSOCIATES INC. June 22,2000 & ASSOCIATES JUN 2 6 2000 Mr, Mike Shirey, HOUSING^JfimA^ CITY OF CARLSBAD OEPARSOPWENT 1635 Faraday Avenue Carisbad. CA. 92008 Subject: Army and Navy Academy Daily Trip Generation Dear Mr. Shirey: This letter provides a follow up to our telephone conversation on June 20, 2000. As we discussed, the report previously prepared by RKJK & Associates (FIKJK) did not include an average daily traffic (ADT)/daily trip generation estimate for the Army and Navy Academy, The previous report was focused on the potential effeds of closing Cypress Avenue (which is no longer under consideration), and no site specilic ADT estimate was needed. We have therefore prepared an ADT estimate based on San Olego Association of Govemments (SANDAG) criteria. The recommended explanatory variable for middle/junior high schools is the number of students enrolled. Bolh the current Master Plan and the proposed Master Plan serve 320 students, most of whom reside at the site. Table 1 summarizes the dally ADT estimate for the Army and Navy Academy. There is no change in the projected daily ADT estimate from the current Master Plan to the proposed Master Plan. It is a pleasure providing this information for your review and uue in processing the project application. If you have any questions regarding this, ple^ise give me a call at (949)474-0809. Sincerely, RKJK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Carleton Waters, P.E, Senior Associate CW:sjf/11149 JN:1229-99-01 XC: Mr.Richard Hannasch, ARMY ANC) NAVY ACADEMY Attachment Mr. Robert Morales, TBP ARCHITECTURE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING • C15 • TRAFFIC/ACOUSTICAL l:NGINEERINC 1601 Dove Street, Suite 290 • Newport Beach, CA 92660 • Phone:(949) 474-0809 • Fax:(949)474-0902 Sent by:RKJK Jun-23-00 07:08ai<» fron 9494740902>9496730300 page 3/ 3 TABLE 1 ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY DAILY TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY EXPLANATORY VARIABLE QUANTITY DAILY TRIP RATE' DA LY TRIPS Students 320 1,4 450 ^ Daily Trip Rate Source:(Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Dlego Region, San Diego Association of Governments, July, 1998. j:kktables\kk11100\Kkl 1149tb JN:1229-99-01 ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY RECEIVED Inspiring Excellence Since 1910 OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT JUN 26 2000 June 22, 2000 RECEIVED JUN 28 2000 tBP ARCHITECTURE CITYOF CARLSBAD HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Housing and Development Department City of Carisbad 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B Carisbad, CA 92018 Attn: Lori Rosenstein, Management Analyst RE: Under-grounding of Utilities Planning Submittal Comment Dear Ms. Rosenstein: This letter is in response to the City Engineering Department's, "Major Issues of Concern," comment from your letter dated March 31, 2000. Army and Navy Academy's administrators met with San Diego Gas and Electric, our architect (tBP), and our electrical engineer (GLP/Karjala) to discuss under-grounding of existing overhead utilites. Attached is GLP/Karjala's memo dated May 8, 2000, and SDG&E's response dated May 12, 2000. As presented and discussed at our June 6 meeting, we propose to relocate utility poles within our Phase 1 Scope of Work in lieu of under-grounding. Our proposal is due to impacts on the residential properties on the north side of Pacific Avenue and our campus-renewal master plan. Under-grounding will be considered during future phases as required by our master plan and the City of Carisbad. If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to me at 760-729-2385, x207. Sincerely, Stephen A. Miller President cc: Anthony DePaola, tBP/Architecture Post Office Box 3000 Carlsbad, CA 92018 (760) 729-2385 ext. 207 Fax (760) 720-7121 www.armyandnavyacademy.org ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY RECEIVED Inspirin£i Excellence Since 1910 OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT June 22, 2000 m 2 6 2000 CITYOF CARLSBAD HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Housing and Development Department City of Carisbad 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B Carisbad, CA 92018 Attn: Lori Rosenstein, Management Analyst RE: Amendment to Master Plan Planning Submittal Comment Dear Ms. Rosenstein: The Army and Navy Academy's current planning applications are in response to our fire- damaged dormitory building. Our need to replace the building caused us to review our Master Plan and submit planning documents for phases adjoining the now removed fire-damaged building. At our recent meetings with the City's staff, we were advised to only amend phase one of the master plan, to include replacement of the dormitory building. Beginning in September 2000, the Academy and our consultants will reassess the future campus renewal master plan in consideration of our needs and in compliance with the guidelines ofthe City of Carisbad. We appreciate all of the City's staff comments on our previous submittals, and hope that we will reach a mutual conclusion on our resubmitted documents. COL Stephen A. Miller President cc: Anthony DePaola, tBP/Architecture Post Office Box 3000 Carlsbad, CA 92018 (760) 729-2385 ext. 207 Fax (760) 720-7121 www.armyandnavyacademy.org tBP/Architecture June 19, 2000 Housing and Development Department City of Carlsbad 2%5 Roosevelt Street, Suite B Carlsbad, CA 92018 Attn: Lori Rosenstein, Management Analyst Re: RP99-14/CDP99-49 Resubmittal Response Army and Navy Academy tBP P/N 99014.00 RECEIVED UUN 26 2000 CITYOFCARLSBAD HOUSINGS REDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Architecture Planning Interiors Management Dear Ms. Rosenstein: In response to the City of Carlsbad's comments dated March 31, 2000, we resubmit the following as our written responses. Additionally, the Academy has deleted Phase 3 and Phase 8 from their application. ENGINEERING COMMENTS 1. Ouaiity of drawings: As presented and accepted at our June 6 meeting with Mike Shirey, the attached civil site plan is hereby submitted. 2. Traffic Information: The attached previous traffic study dated December 7, 1993 and the attached letter from the Study's Traffic Engineer are submitted as requested. 3. Application Number: As previously requested, application numbers were placed on site plans. AU attached drawings now have the application numbers. 4. Easement Information: Included in the submittal is an encumbrance plat on our site plan, and each easement's recording information. 5. Street Lights: The attached civil site plan indicates Phase 1 street lights along Pacific Avenue. 6. See Comment No. 1 note. 7. Carlsbad Blvd. Street Improvements: We met with Doug Helming and have indicated "future capitol improvements" per his "preliminary" plan, which is attached. 8. Hydrology Information: No comment. 2300 Newport Boulevard • Newport Beach, CA 92663-3799 • Fhone: (949) 673-0300 • Fax:(949) 673-9267 Lori Rosenstein, Management Analyst Housing and Development Department City of Carlsbad Page 2 of 3 ENGINEERING COMMENTS (continued) 9. Major Issue of Concern: The under-grounding of utilities is addressed in the attached letter from the Army and Navy Academy, and the attached correspondences regarding discussions with SDG&E. HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMENTS 1. Site Plan: See attached revised Phase 1 site plan. 2. Architectural Design Guidelines: See attached revised amendment, which identifies the "optional" use of the amendment. 3. Carlsbad Municipal Water District: See attached civil site plan for new water and sewer connections along Pacific Avenue. FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. Fire Sprinkler System: As indicated on our previous submittal and the attached site plan, the proposed dormitory building will be fully fire sprinklered. 2. Existing Buildings: The existing building areas will not be increased. 3. Details: See attached site plan. 4. Additional Requirements: Please provide all requirements. BUILDING DEPARTMENT (PHASE 1) 1. New Parking Lot: An accessible space is indicated on the attached site plan. Additionally, we previously and currently indicate new accessible spaces at the existing parking lot. 2. Remodeling of Existing Admin and Cafeteria Buildings: This work has been deleted from the application Scope of Work. Lori Rosenstein, Management Analyst Housing and Development Department City of Carlsbad Fage 3 of 3 BUILDING DEPARTMENT (PHASE 1^ (continued) 3. Existing Dormitory Room: This work is a part of the Academy's proposed work. 4. New Dormitory Building: The attached site plan indicates an access ramp and accessible dorms/toilets on the first floor. 5. Temporary Modular Buildings: The attached plans have been revised to clearly note demolition of temporary buildings. Please do not hesitate to call Col. Miller, Tony DePaola or myself with any comments or concerns. Very Truly Yours, tBP/Architecture Robert Morales, Project Architect cc: Col. Steven Miller, Army & Navy Academy Anthony DePaola, tBP/Architecture RM:lkb tBP/Architecture June 19, 2000 Housing and Development Department City of Carlsbad 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B Carlsbad, CA 92018 Attn: Lori Rosenstein, Management Analyst Re: RP99-14/CDP99-49 Resubmittal Response Army and Navy Academy tBP P/N 99014.00 RECEIVED JUN 26 2O00 CITYOFCARLSBAD HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Architecture Planning Interiors Management Dear Ms. Rosenstein: In response to the City of Carlsbad's comments dated March 31, 2000, we resubmit the following as our written responses. Additionally, the Academy has deleted Phase 3 and Phase 8 from their application. ENGINEERING COMMENTS 1. Ouaiity of drawings: As presented and accepted at our June 6 meeting with Mike Shirey, the attached civil site plan is hereby submitted. 2. Traffic Information: The attached previous traffic study dated December 7, 1993 and the attached letter from the Study's Traffic Engineer are submitted as requested. 3. Application Number: As previously requested, application numbers were placed on site plans. All attached drawings now have the application numbers. 4. Easement Information: Included in the submittal is an encumbrance plat on our site plan, and each easement's recording information. 5. Street Lights: The attached civil site plan indicates Phase 1 street lights along Pacific Avenue. 6. See Comment No. 1 note. 7. Carlsbad Blvd. Street Improvements: We met with Doug Helming and have indicated "future capitol improvements" per his "preliminary" plan, which is attached. 8. Hydrology Information: No comment. 2300 Newport Boiik x ar-d • Newport Beach, GA 92663-3799 • Phone:(949) 673-03 00 • Fax:(949) 673-9267 Lori Rosenstein, Management Analyst Housing and Development Department City of Carlsbad Fage 2 of 3 ENGINEERING COMMENTS (continued) 9. Major Issue of Concern: The under-grounding of utilities is addressed in the attached letter from the Army and Navy Academy, and the attached correspondences regarding discussions with SDG&E. HOUSING AND RFDFVELOPMENT COMMENTS 1. Site Plan: See attached revised Phase 1 site plan. 2. Architectural Design Guidelines: See attached revised amendment, which identifies the "optional" use of the amendment. 3. Carlsbad Municipal Water District: See attached civil site plan for new water and sewer connections along Padfic Avenue. FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. Fire Sprinkler System: As indicated on our previous submittal and the attached site plan, the proposed dormitory building will be fuUy fire sprinklered. 2. Existing Buildings: The existing building areas will not be increased. 3. Details: See attached site plan. 4. Additional Requirements: Please provide all requirements. BUILDING DEPARTMENT (PHASE 1) 1. New Parking Lot: An accessible space is indicated on th« attached site plan. Additionally, we previously and currently indicate new accessible spaces at the existing parking lot. 2. Remodeling of Existing Admin and Cafeteria Buildings: This work has been deleted from the application Scope of Work. Lori Rosenstein, Management Analyst Housing and Development Department City of Carlsbad Fage 3 of 3 BUILDING DEPARTMENT (PHASE 1) (continued) 3. Existing Dormitory Room: This work is a part of the Academy''s proposed work. 4. New Dormitory Building: The attached site plan indicates an access ramp and accessible dorms/toilets on the first floor. 5. Temporary Modular Buildings: The attached plans have been revised to clearly note demolition of temporary buildings. Please do not hesitate to call Col. MiUer, Tony DePaola or myself with any comments or concerns. Very Truly Yours, tBP/Architecture Robert Morales, Project Architect cc: Col. Steven Miller, Army & Navy Academy Anthony DePaola, tBP/Architecture RM:lkb Citv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department August 7, 2000 ROBERT MORALES TBP ARCHITECTURE 2300 NEWPORT BLVD NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 SUBJECT: ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY (RP99-14/CDP99-49) On June 26, 2000 the Housing and Redevelopment Department received the revised project plans and corresponding project information requested by the City of Carisbad in our letter to you dated March 31, 2000. The items requested from you eariier to make your Major Redevelopment Permit (application no. RP99-14) and Coastal Development Permit (application no. CDP99-49) complete have been received and reviewed by the Housing and Redevelopment Department along with ali other appropriate City departments. It has been determined that the applications are now complete for processing. Although the initial processing of your applications may have already begun, the technical acceptance date is July 26, 2000. Please note that although the applications are now considered complete, there may be issues that could be discovered during project review and/or environmental review. Any issues shouid be resolved prior to scheduling the project for public hearing. In addition, the City may request, in the course of processing the applications that you clarify, amplify, correct, or otherwise, supplement the basic information required for the application. The following list of issues of concern contains all comments I have received to date from other departments. Additional comments will be forthcoming under a separate letter. Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813 if you have any questions regarding the information contained in this letter. Sincerely, LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst Attachment c: Mike Shirey, Engineering Department Mike Grim, Planning Department Mike Smith, Fire Department Pat Kelley, Building Department 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbaci, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 Issues of Concern Building Department: The Building Department has completed its review of the subject project for application completeness. The following issues have been identified: 1. The Mountain View parking area still does not have adequate handicapped parking. Please consult State Code Section 1129B; Table 11 B-6 for correct accessible parking ratios in each lot. 2. The civil site plan does not show the illegal structure (the archery range enclosure) for which the applicant was recently sent a violation notice. If it is intended for the illegal structures to remain, the site plan should show all proposed structures. City of T^arlsbad FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL II. IMIIN 1 nil. II 1 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ aVTE: 8/7/00 TIME SENT: 5:30 D.m. No. of pages transmitted (Including fax transmittal page): 3 TO: Robert Morales FROM: Lori Rosenstein COMPANY: tBP Architecture DEPT: HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT PHONE: (949) 673-0300 PHONE #: (760) 434- 2813 FAX (949) 673-9267 FAX#: (760) 720-2037 E-MAIL #: lrose(gci.carlsbad.ca.us Please see attached letter. Mike Shirey, Engineering and Mike Grim, Planning said that they would be sending you their comments under a separate letter. If you have any questions, please contact Mike Shirey at 760-602-2747. I will be back in the office on August 2ist. This written message is for the exclusive use of the addressee and may contain confidential, privileged, and non-disclosable information. If the recipient of this message is not the addressee, or a person responsible for delivering the message to the addressee, then the recipient is prohibited from reading or using this message in any way. If you have received this message by mistake, please call us immediately and destroy the telecopy message. Housing & Redevelopment Department • 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B • Carlsbad, California 92008 Citv of Carlsbad Public Works - Engineer August 28, 2000 Robert Morales TBP ARCHITECTURE 2300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 RP 99-14, CDP 99-49: ARMY/NAVY ACADEMY (ANA) 1999 - MPA & DORMITORIES FIRST ISSUES REVIEW Dear Robert, Engineering Department staff have completed a third review of the above-referenced project for application completeness and have determined that the application and plans submitted for the project are complete. Prior to engineering staff making a determination on the project, the following engineering issues of concern must be resolved/adequately addressed: Traffic & Transportation 1. Thank you for submitting the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) information for the project. As p[previously requested, however, please add this information (i.e., ADT = 450tpd) to sheet AS-1. 2. Please indicate proposed and future clear 275 ft. Caltrans Corner Sight Distance sight lines, for both directions at the proposed driveway, on the preliminary landscape plan sheet L-1; civil site plan, sheet C-4; and, architectural site plan, sheet AS-3. 3. Please adequately address the following issues regarding the proposed parking lot: a. Proposed parking spaces that are adjacent to each other at an angle must have 5' offsets for motorist maneuverability. b. Is parking lot lighting required/proposed? c. Please fully dimension the proposed parking lot (i.e., parking spaces, drive aisle, driveway, etc.). d. Provide calculations showing that the retention basin is of sufficient size to retain a 10-Year storm event, in accordance with the Local Coastal Program. 4. Thank you for showing the location of the existing dwelling units (D/U) along the north side of Pacific Avenue. However, as requested at the June 6, 2000, staff/applicant meeting, please also show the topography to the edge of pavement (EP), where the EP is located, any existing improvements/utilities, etc. 5. Please add typical street sections for Pacific Avenue and Mountain View Drive on the civil site plan, sheet C-4, showing existing and "potential" future improvements and label as such. 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-2720 • FAX (760) 602-8562 @ RP 99-14, CDP 99-49: ARMY/NAVY ACADEMY (ANA) 1999 FIRST ISSUES REVIEW R. MORALES LETTER; AUGUST 28, 2000 Sewer & Water 1. Is the sewer lateral that is being shown on the civil site plan, sheet C-4, existing or proposed? If it is proposed, how did the existing building sewer, and why is the sewer flow being changed? 2. Are the water meters being shown on the civil site plan, sheet C-4, existing or proposed? If they are proposed, the water meters must be located within the public right of way. Also, what size meters are going to be required? The Carisbad Municipal Water District (CMWD) maximum meter size is 2 inch. Show a Double Detector Check Valve (DDCV) assembly for the fire fiow line. 3. Please label the type of pipe proposed for water line (laterals) on sheet C-4. 4. Please label the size and type of pipe for the existing sewer and wateriine in Pacific Avenue on sheet C-4, as follows: Sewer = 8 inch VCP; Water = 6 inch RTAC, per DWG 133-6. 5. Please list project demand for potable water in gallons per minute (gpm), on sheet AS-1. 6. Meet with the City's Fire Marshall to determine fire flow demand in gpm. Show this the fire flow demand on sheet AS-1. Gradina & Drainaae 1. Drainage issues for the proposed building. a. Multiple roof drains discharging directly to Pacific Avenue are unacceptable. Roof runoff must be captured on-site and then should be directed through a vegetated swale along the front of the building, tying into the proposed on-site storm drain. Submit calculations showing the proposed runoff flows (Q in cfs) and velocity (V in fps) for the discharge into the street for a 100-Year storm event. b. Show how the westeriy proposed retaining wall is going to drain in accordance with the Preliminary Geo-technical Study, Section 3.10 on page 11. c Indicate the "top-of-wall (TW)/bottom-of-wall (BW)" retaining wall heights. d. Is the flow line that is being shown at the toe of slope on the south side of the building supposed to be a Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) or vegetated brow ditch? 2. The Preliminary Geo-technical Study, Section 3.2 on page's 6 & 7, states that the existing slope along the northeriy side of the proposed parking lot, . . is too steep for long term surficial stability." The report lists as mitigation measures: 1) using erosion mats; or, 2) re-grading the slope at iy2:1 (City Standards are 2:1). If this existing slope will not provide stability for the proposed parking lot, then it must be mitigated. Therefore, provide documentation from the Soils Engineer specifically indicating whether this slope is impacted by the proposed parking lot and whether it must be mitigated (i.e., re-graded and compacted at 2:1). RP 99-14, CDP 99-49: ARMY/NAVY ACADEMY (ANA) 1999 FIRST ISSUES REVIEW R. MORALES LETTER; AUGUST 28, 2000 Land Title & Mappina 1. Unfortunately, the easement information that is being shown is still incorrect. Sheet C-1 indicates that the August 11, 1999, Preliminary title Report (PR) was used, however, the numbering is off. For example, PR Item No.'s 4, 6, 7 & 13 on sheet C-1 are really Item No.'s 6, 9, 10 & 16 of Schedule "B" of the PR. Also, it seems that not all of the applicable easements have been shown. For example, various easements indicate that they affect certain parcels, like parcel "A" or Parcel "E." But then, other easements that also indicate that they reflect the same parcels are not shown. It seems that easement item No.'s 11-15, 17, 18, 22-25, 27-35, 45 and 46 still must be shown. The way that the information is being shown (i.e., tabular information with corresponding numbers is acceptable), but, it seems that the information must be shown with greater accuracy. Please verify and revise. 2. Please create a new Site Plan, plan set, as follows: Make sheet's AS-1, AS-3, C-1, C-4 and L-1, sheet's 1 through 5 of 5, respectively. 3. Please make sure that any revisions that are made to one plan sheet, are also made to any other applicable plan sheets. Staff had hoped to be able to draft the Engineering Conditions of Approval for the project at this time. However, as previously indicated, specific engineering issues of concern were not previously addressed because the application was still incomplete. The remaining engineering issues have now been identified. A redlined check print is attached for your use in making the requested revisions. This redlined check print must be returned with the revised plans to facilitate continued staff review. If you or anyone from ANA have any questions, please contact me directly at 760/602-2747. Sincerely, MICHAI Associate Engineer - Engineering/Development Services attachment c: Senior Civil Engineer - Engineering/Development Services Associate Planner - M. Grim Management Analyst - L. Rosenstein /-13-20D0 :2DAM FRQM-KLEINFELDE^RVINE 949-727-924Z ^ RR.D GEOTECHNICAL MEMORArA T-QZ4 P.DD2/002 F-S13 M I EINFELDER III [NT. „iOE> LOCATION; _ CONTRACTOR ':i II;NT':;,.FJHLD F EPRESENTATIVE i; : :iilNl-£R/GEOLOGI$T .GRADING PERMIT: JOB NUMBER: 9ZJ^^^ / REPORT NO: DATE; ifjl-^joii f>Av. AtQ^^)r ^OF;/ J>AGE; tl!Ai;!:KS; JeL- 003 SIGNATURE- 1/09 NACK& PEZESHKI ENGINEERING 300 Carlsbad Milage Drive Suite 205 Carisbad, CA 92008 Pli: (760) 720-1205 Fax: (760) 720-0841 E-mail: nack(^,priinenet. com October 26,2000 tBP/Architecture 2300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Atten: Robert Morales Re: Army/Navy Academy Carlsbad, CA ^ Public Works - Engmeermg Comments tBP/Architecure No. 99033.00 Nack & PezeshM Engmeering No. CA941N Dear Robert: Below, please find our responses to the comments made by Mr. Michael J. Shirey of the City of Carlsbad Public Works Department in his letter of August 28, 2000. We are only responding the "Sewer & Water" comments portion of the letter. 1. Zs the sewer lateral that is being shown on the civil site plan, sheet C-4, existing or proposed? - The sewer lateral is proposed. Ifit is proposed, how did the existing building sewer, and why is the sewer flow being changed? - The sewer exiting the proposed building cannot meet the existing invert elevations. In addition future phases to the campus would necessitate the proposed sewer lateral. 2. Are the water meters being shown in the civil site plan, sheet C-4, existing or proposed? - The domestic and fire water lateral are proposed. If they are proposed, the water meters must be located with in the public right of way. - Concur, see revised sheet PS-1. Also, what size meters are going to be required? The Carlsbad Municipal Water District (CMWD) maximum meter size is 2 inch. - 2" Meter will be used, see revised PS-1. Mr. Morales October 26,2000 Page 2 NACK & PEZESHKI ENGINEERING Show a Double Detector Check Valve (DDCV) assembly for the flre flow line. - See PS-1 for location and installation. 3. Please label the type of pipe proposed for the water line (laterals) on sheet C-4 - See sheet PS-1 for information. 4. Please label the size and type of pipe for the existing sewer and water line in Pacific Avenue on sheet C-4, as follows: Sewer = 8 inch VCP; Water = 6 inch RTAC, per DWG-133-6. Concur, see revised sheet PS-1. 5.. Please list project demandfor potable water in gallons per minute (gpm), on sheet AS-l. - See revised PS-1. 6. Meet with City's Fire Marshall to determine flre flow demand in gpm. Show this flre flow demand on sheet AS-L - See revised PS-1. Also see attached hydraulic calculations that determine fire flow. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any comments or questions. Sincerely, Nack & Pezeshki Engine|^g David ^/plack, P.E. PrincjJ cc: Anthony DePaola Citv of Carlsbad FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL DATE: 12/7/00 TIME SENT: M5 3:Oei3.m. No. of pages transmitted (including fax transmittal page): TO: Robert Morales COMPANY: PHONE: FAX (949^67^e-926Z_ Zi5 -SSI- SS33 FROM: Lori Rosenstein DEPT: HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT PHONE #: (760) 434- 2813 FAX #: (760) 720-2037 E-MAIL #: Irose©ci.carlsbad.ca.us Robert: Per your request, I have attached a copy of the comments I received from Mike Shirey. I will send you an official letter next week. I hope this will suffice for now. This written message is for the exclusive use of the addressee and may contain confidential, privileged, and non-disclosable information. If the recipient of this message is not the addressee, or a person responsible for delivering the message to the addressee, then the recipient is prohibited from reading or using this message in any way. If you have received this message by mistake, please call us immediately and destroy the telecopy message. Housing & Redevelopment Department • 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B • Carlsbad, Califomia 92008 tBP/Architecture Newport Beach • Oakland • Los Angeles November 14, 2000 Lori Rosenstein Management Analyst-Housing & Redevelopment CITY OF CARLSBAD 2695 Roosevelt Street, Suite B Carlsbad, Ca 92008 Re: Planning Resubmittal Army and Navy Academy RP99-14/CD99-49 tBP P/N 99014.00 RECEIVED ffOV 15 2000 Architecture Planninj^ Interiors Manaf>ement Dear Lori: We have completed our responses to tiie City's comments and submit the enclosed documents per the following: LETTER FROM MICHAEL J. SHIREY DATED AUGUST 28, 2000: Traffic & Transportation 1. 2. 3a. 3b. 3c. 3d. 4&5 ADT added to sheet 1 (previous sheet AS-1). Sitelines indicated on sheets 5, 4 and 2 (previous sheets L-1, C-4 and AS-3). Parking spaces revised on site plans. Yes. Parking lot lights are indicated on sheet 2 (previous sheet AS-3). Parking lot is fully dimensioned on civil site plan, sheet 4. See enclosed Hydrology Study from DCI Engineering, Inc., the project's Civil Engineer. Information indicated on civil site plan, drawing 4 Sewer and Water See enclosed letter from Nack and Pezeshki Engineering, the project's Mechanical Engineer. Information is indicated on the civil site plan. Grading and Drainage la. See enclosed Hydrology Study from DCI Engineering, Inc. for water runoff flows. lb &lc See revised civil site plan, drawing 4. Id. Vegetated brow ditch is indicated on civil site plan. 2. See revised civil site plan and enclosed memo from Kleinfelder, Inc., the project's Geotechnical Engineer. 2300 Newport Boulevard • Newport Beach, GA 92663-3799 • Phone: (949) 673-0300 • Fax:(949)673-9267 Lori Rosenstein City of Carlsbad Analyst tBP P/N 99014.00 Page 2 Land Title and Mapping 1. See revised encumbrance plot drawing 2, per discussions between Mike Shirey and Doug Melchoir, the project's Land Surveyor. 2. As requested, we have revised the order of our drawings as directed and per my discussion with Lori Rosenstein. 3. See enclosed plans. LETTER FROM LORI ROSENSTEIN DATED AUGUST 7, 2000: Building Department 1. Added one accessible (handicapped) parking space on site plans. 2. Added the existing archery range enclosure on site plan drawings. As discussed, we will await the City's direction regarding any additional issues and public hearings. Please do not hesitate to contact Colonial Miller, Anthony DePaola or myself with any questions. Very Truly Yours, tBP/Architecture )rales Project Architect cc: Colonial Stephan Miller, Army and Navy Academy Anthony DePaola, tBP/Architecture Enclosures: 6 sets of blueline drawings August 28 letter from Mike Shirey August 7 letter from Lori Rosenstein Redlined check prints October 26 letter from Nack & Pezeshki Engineering Hydrology Study fi'om DCI Engineering, Inc. Fire Flow Hydraulic Calculations from Nack and Pezeshki Engineering November 13 memorandum from Kleinfelder, Inc. RM/nm P/99014/Proj MngmtyCorresp/Ll 11300Rosenstein Transmittal Date: To: Attn: Proj: Proj No.: From: cc: Signature 12/20/00 The City of Carlsbad, Housing & Redevelopment 2695 Roosevelt St, Suite B Carisbad, Cahfomia 92008 Lori Rosenstein, Management Analyst Master Plan and Development Submittal Army and Navy Academy 99014.00 Robert Morales, tBP/Architecture Anthony DePaola, tBP, File iISi Transmitting I 11 Change Orders • I Prints (ZD I Construction Docs [ZD I Specifications Architecture Planning Interiors Management RECEIVED 2000 CITYOF CARLSBAD HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • I Copy of Letter • I • I Submittal •] IZIII Under Separate Cover O O I Shop Drawings • Samples Preliminary Drawings Diskettes other Qty Description (3) Revised plans & drawings nete^v)6C?l 81/2x11 and 30'' x 42" colored floor plan, exterior elevations and color board (1) Revised Hydrology Study from DCI Engineering Message • • • • • For Your Use Approved as Corrected Approved Correct & Return For Approval Please Return • | U.P.S. • I U.P.S. Overnight • I U.P.S. 2"" Day • I Fed Ex • I O.C.B. Deiivery IZII I tBP Delivery (ZJ I U.S. Mail • tBP/Architecture 2300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA. 92663 ph: 949 673 0300 fax: 949 673 926/ Citv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department December 22, 2000 ROBERT MORALES TBP ARCHITECTURE 2300 NEWPORT BLVD NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 SUBJECT: ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY (RP99-14/CDP99-49) Dear Robert, I have enclosed a red-lined check print set containing the suggested corrections from our landscape plan check consultant. Please make the corrections to the landscape plan and forward two copies to me for final processing. Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813 if you have any questions regarding this letter. Sincerelv^^^^ LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst Enclosure 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 ^ Transmittal Date: 1/3/01 To: The City of Carlsbad, Housing & Redevelopment 2695 Roosevelt St., Suite B Carisbad, Cahfomia 92008 Attn: Lori Rosenstein, Management Analyst Proj: Master Plan and Development Submittal Army and Navy Academy Proj No.: 99014.00 From: Robert Morales, tBP/Architecture 00: Anthony Depaola, tBP, File Signature Transmitting I 11 Change Orders • I Prints [33 I Construction Docs IZH I Specifications Architecture Planning Interiors Management JAN 0,'-< 2001 n I Copy of Letter • • I Submittal • • I Under Separate Cover • O I Shop Drawings • Samples Preliminary Drawings Diskettes Other Qty Description (1) 81/2x11 colored floor plans, exterior elevations and colored board (1) 30" X 42" colored floor plan and exterior elevations (2) Revised landscape plan NioV- v€C<lV'^^A (1) Red hned print from City of Carlsbad Message • • • • • For Your Use Approved as Corrected Approved Correct & Return For Approval Piease Return • I U.P.S. IZH I U.P.S. Overnight • I U.P.S. 2"" Day • I Fed Ex • • • O.C.B. Delivery tBP Delivery U.S. Mail tBP/Architecture 2300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA. 92663 ph: 949 673 0300 fax: 949 673 926' Citv of*(?a rlsbad FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL DATE: TIME SENT: No. of pages transmitted 2/05/01 12:00 p.m. (includinq fax transmittal paqe): 5 TO: Tony DePaola FROM: Lori Rosenstein COMPANY: tBP Architecture DEPT: HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT PHONE: (949) 673-0300 PHONE #: (760) 434- 2813 FAX (949) 673-9267 FAX #: (760) 720-2037 E-MAIL #: lrose@ci.carisbad.ca.us Tony: Please review the attached letter. The original with the marked-up plans from Engineering has been sent via regular postal service. This written message is for the exclusive use of the addressee and may contain confidential, privileged, and non-disclosable information. If the recipient of this message is not the addressee, or a person responsible for delivering the message to the addressee, then the recipient is prohibited from reading or using this message in any way. If you have received this message by mistake, please call us immediately and destroy the telecopy message. Housing & Redevelopment Department • 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B • Carlsbad, Califomia 92008 Fax Cover Paae ^ M ^'0% J» ' Architecture Fax #: 7|^.r • \O^Z- Plannmg From:YMi|^jr id^cA^U^ ^"^^^""^ frfiP^ r - •! Management CCI Proj: ^1^^ ff4AI^ ,^,^^MMI[^ Proj No.: ^ # of Pages^^ , including tiiis cover sheet Message/Memo rBP/Aivhi(ecuire 2300 Newport Boii!e\a!-d : ,eM port Beach. CA. 92663 ph; ^-jo ,,73 0300 !a\: 949 673 9267 ^ ^ ^ Q m 9 Q ^ !XISTIN6 TENNIS COURTS EXISTIN6 TENNIS OPURTS TO REMAIN. NEW PARKIN6 LOT EXPANSION TO BE PROVIDED UNDER PHASE ^ WORK TO TOTAL 107 PARKIN6 SPACES. LIMIT OF WORK CONC 'SHED/ EXISTIN6 OUTDOOR EDUCATIONAL CLASSROOM (E; LANDSCAPINC PROPOSED PARKINC LOT (SSj NON ACCESSIBLE STALLS {2) PROPOSED ACCESSIBLE CAR STALL \ \e I.OT (NCE PROPOSED AC. PAVIN6 / / /I / / / / / / r- PROPOSED / um FIXTURESi P. / PROPOSED 6" WIDE PERIMETER OF PROPOSED LANDSCAPINC' / ^J^^t0^ Fax Cover Paae Architecture Fax #: ^CO* ^CfZ ^ (O^^ ' Planning —. » ^ _ • I . Interiors Management cc: Proj: j^t^//dA^r 4tfA6^rfK Proj No.: # of Pages: , including this cover sheet • Message/Memo tBP:'ArclM(fCiure 2300 Newport Boiile\ ard NevDort Beach. CA. 92663 oh: 949 o?3 0300 fax: 949 673 926' r •Tl If 3 cs I 19 Citv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department February 5, 2001 ANTHONY DEPAOLA ^ 0 6 TBP ARCHITECTURE ^^ARfUiy- 2300 NEWPORT BLVD '^'tCT/jr^ mi TBP ARCHITECTURE ^^^RCH]' NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 SUBJECT: ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY MPA & DORMITORY (RP99-14/CDP99-49) Dear Tony: City staff has completed the fifth review of the above referenced project. Prior to staff making a determination on the project, the following items of clarification and Issues of concern must be resolved and/or adequately addressed: PLANNING & REDEVELOPMENT: he original master plan parking arrangement was based upon a maximum of 350 students and 100 employees. The amount of required parking was assessed per the Zoning Ordinance standard for high schools: one space per employee and one space per ten students. Since the existing parking totaled only 25 spaces and many of the students lived on campus without cars, etc., the master plan was conditioned to only add part of the total parking requirement concurrent with the first phase of d^velopment. According to Exhibit G t 1 of RP 94-02, this amounted to 48 additional spaces. APP^ .J^f^^Y 36» ^^^i^ Therefore, a minimum of 48 parking spaces is required to be constructed along Mountain View in conjunction with the first phase of deveiopment, which in this case is the dormitory. In response to the timing of construction of the remainder of the required parking, it is staffs position that all required on-site parking shall be installed and all existing parking be brought up to current regulations at the time the next major remodel/construction project occurs on- site. This will be added as a condition of project approval for the dormitory. Again, the required parking is based upon a maximum of 350 students and 100 employees; any changes to those numbers would result in a reevaluation of parking requirements. Please add a breakdown of the existing, proposed, and future parking data to the summary data sheet. Currently the site plan shows the remainder of the parking to take place during Phase 9 of construction. This difference of opinion is worthy of some discussion with staff and a possible change to the site plan note. — y^vvSB A€> 72P75^ f^A'^^k /irOP^Jp On the project data sheet please provide a breakdown of existing afid proposed beds with regard to the number of students and faculty. The information imould verv cleariy identify the number of existing beds, the number of beds being removed as part of the proposed demolition, the number of proposed beds, ihe number of resident students, the number of' day s^^c^ents, and the number nf pmplr^YfafiR^^ijtfrhiR nan hP .Qhr>wn in twr>'tables. The tinal tally should show the total number of students does not exceed 350 and the total number of employees does not exceed 100. Staff is concerned that based on the information provided, the number of beds being added causes total enrollment to exceed 350 students. Make sure the site plan data is consistent with the information provided on the project data sheet, j^^^) ^Ai^^T^ yrjh^ 6S^05 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carisbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 Army & Navy Academy RP99-14/CDP99-49 2/5/01 Paqe 2 3/^umt LUC O umber ail parking spaces (existing and proposed) for ease of identification and reference. For instance, it appears that there are oniy 24 existing spaces shown on the site plan (Sheet 2) when the plan calls out 25. Also, Sheet 2 calls out 38 proposed paricing spaces in the Mountain View paridng lot. This is inconsistent with the 48 spaces shown on the project data sheet (Sheet 1). In addition, as explained above, a minimum of 48 parking spaces are required to be constructed in conjunction with the first phase of development as set forth in the existing Master Plan conditions of approval, ^^^^f^ fVBMS ^^/^!^Staff is concerned that the 3' separation between the proposed dormitory and the adjacent academic building to the east does not make good design sense. According to the Building Department, the proposed 3' building separation conforms to the Uniform Building Code if the existing building has no external openings along that area. Please note, depending on the floor plan of the existing building, you may need to delete rooms to accommodate the 3' building separation. Please address this issue in your future submittal. ^^e>3l^ ^IC£V - To. The landscape plan submitted with the last set of plans appears to contain only a few changes suggested by our landscape plancheck consultant. Please confirm this is the most recent landscape plan and advise staff if you are proposing any additionai changes. Please include the most recent landscape plan with all future plan submittals. l^^fb'BjP Existing campus plan (sheet A-1) should include the location of the archery range and temporary classrooms. In addition, Building 37 should be removed, as I do not believe it dsts any longer, fivrc^^ BPO^kTlO^M^ ^U¥>^(;c^ (Md^')M:)OeJ(0 ^ l^pf^"^ Staff suggests the elimination of the Phasing Plan for simplification purposes for the following reasons: 1) it is our understanding that ANA is currently conducting a comprehensive needs assessment and will be submitting a comprehensive Master Plan lendment In the future which will better address the development of future pleases; and 2) 'the current Master Plan for ANA permits the phases to occur In any order. ^/i?/r71fc^ ^ The east and west building elevations shown on the colored building elevations submitted on January 3, 2001 are inconsistent with the roof plan shown on sheet A-3. Please modify "gt for consistency. Does the roof pitch continue to the peak or flatten out at the top. The ^ ENGINEERING: f^'^T^ 8. Tra#/c <S Transportation l,"^. As previously requested, please revise the "future" curb to curb and right of way widths for Mountain View Drive to 20V30', respectively. This is not a cul-de-sac street, and therefore, must meet Local Street Standards. Additional public right of way dedication will be required. Also, revise the Civil, Architectural and Landscape plan view widths/design to meet Local OP Sewer & Water z The sewer design is exactly the same. Staff had previously asked for clarification regarding this design (i.e., the need for a new sewer lateral). If the plan is to still install an on-site sewer main to service future buildings, then, as previously indicated, a different design is required. Also as previously indicated, there may be no need to cut into the street to install Army & Navy Academy RP99-14/CDP99-49 2/5/01 Page 3 a new lateral (since the street is not being improved at this time) if the existing lateral can be utilized. This issue still needs to be addressed. (Please see Sewer & Water, Issue No. 1, of Engineering Second Issues Review memorandum, dated Deceinber 6, 2000.)'-1Tte|O /n\LL 2. Thank you for revising the proposed potable water and fire services. HoWever, staffs ct^tailed directions were not followed, so additional revisions are required, as follows: ya. First, are you sure that two (2) 4" lines are required? fg^ t^^ferl^ Ct^P* As previously requested, please show a 2" potable water service per Carisbad Municipal Water District (CMWD) Standard W-4. ^(OiSfO^ AO^&O As previously requested, label the Double Detector Check Valve (DDCV) assembly for the fire-flow line as a W-22 (there is no W-28). Also, locate the DDCV out of the public right of way. AP-^^ ^l^ri^L aOT ixa A Backflow Preventor has been added to the potable waterline, please move this out of the pubiic right of way. i^^TI^/J fiBOf^lf^ 3. Again, as previously requested, please indicate that the existing improvement information for Pacific Avenue is from DWG 133-6, on sheet C-4. ^^1^0 VJ ^^l Gradina & Drainaae 1. As previously requested, piease provide documentation from the effected property owner (North County Transit District?), that they concur with the prcposed "slope stabilization mitigation measures," for the proposed parking lot construction. Jm ^U^po^ Thank you for providing surface runoff calculations using information contained in the San Diego Hydrology Manual. The report, as prepared, Is acceptable. However, staff does ve the following comments: a. Staff had previously asked for a basin cross-section on the redlined check prints. This cross-section was not added to the plans (sheet 0-4). Staff needs to see this section because there is some concern with how this basin is actually going to function since the street improvements will not be completed at this time. Therefore, the section should show how the Mountain View drive outfall will furiction with the existing street grades, urbs (proposed outfall seems to be located behind an existing curb), and edge of pavement (EP). Relocate the proposed slopes of the basin over 2' for the additional right of way dedication requirement, and make sure that the basin still has the same capacity. ' Iscellaneous Again, thank you for showing the sight distance sight lines on ail of the applicable plan sheets, and, for adding the previously requested note on the Preliminary Landscape plan (LS). (Please see Miscellaneous, Issue No. 2, of Engineering Second Issues Review memorandum, dated December 6, 2000.) However, LS sheet 5, still needs to be revised, or staffs previous comment must be addressed. The sight line must be clear. The note that Army & Navy Academy RP99-14/CDP99-49 2/5/01 Page 4 added only functions if the proposed trees and vegetation have a canopy of not less V^n 8', and, not greater than 30", respectively. The planting legend was not revised, and 0 explanation was given, if this proposed landscaping meets the 8730" criteria. Therefore, a) provide documentation that this proposed planting schedule meets this criteria; b) revise the planting schedule, so that it does meet this criteria; or, c) remove all vegetation from encroaching Into the site line. Additionally, as previously requested, please add the. second half of the note to the LS, as follows: 'The limits of these sight distance corridors shall be reflected on any improvement, grading, or landscape plan prepared In association with this development." ^^V^v"^ As before, staff had hoped to be able to draft the Engineering Conditions of Approvai for the project at this time. However, again, not aii Issues were addressed. Staff will continue to work with the applicant; however, all issues must be adequately resolved. 3. Previous redlined check prints are attached for the applicanfs use in making the requested revisions. These check prints must be returned v\^ith the revised plans to facilitate continued staff review. Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813 If you have any questions regarding Planning and Redevelopment comments listed above. For questions regarding the engineering comments listed above please contact Mike Shirey at (760) 602-2747. Sincere]^ LORi H. ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst Enclosure Mike Shirey, Engineering Department Mike Grim, Planning Department Pat Kelley, Buiiding Department N A#K & PEZESHKI ENGINEERING I-ACS I MILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET TO: FROM: COMPANY: DATE: FAX NUMBER: TOTAL NO. OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER: 3 PHONE NUMBER: SENDER'S REFERENCE NUMBER: RE: YOUR REFERENCE NUMBER: • URGENT • FOR REVIEW Gl PLEASE COMMENT • PLEASE REPLY • PLEASE RECYCLE NOTES/COMMENTS: 300 CARLSUAD VILLAGE DRIVE. SUITE 205. CARLSBAD, CA 92008 {760)720- 1205 FAX; (760)720-08^1 T0"d L3Z6£l.S6P6l 01 GNia33NIDN3 >IDyN WOdd l.P:cl T002-80-a3d NACK& PEZESHKI ENGINEERING 300 Carisbad Village Drive Suite 205 Carisbad, CA 92008 Ph: (760) 720-1205 Fax: (760) 720-0841 E-mail: nack(5^primenet.com October 26, 2000 tBP/Architecture 2300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Atten: Robert Morales Re: Army/Navy Academy Carlsbad, CA Public Works - Engineering Comments tBP/Architecure No. 99033.00 Nack & Pezeshki Engineering No. CA941N Dear Robert: Below, please find our responses to the coinments made by Mr. Michael J. Shirey of the City ofCarlsbad Public Works Department in his letter of August 28,2000. We are only responding the "Sewer & Water" comments portion of the letter. - • 1. Is the sewer lateral that is being shown on the civil site plan, sheet C-4, existing or proposed? - The sewer lateral is proposed. Ifit is proposed, how did the existing building sewer, and why is the sewer flow being changed? - The sewer exiting the proposed btiilding cannot meet the existing invert elevations. In addition future phases to the campus would necessitate the proposed sewer lateral. Are the water meters being shown in the civil site plan, sheet C-4, existing or proposed? - The domestic and fire water lateral are proposed. If they are proposed, the water meters must be located with in the public right of way. - Concur, see revised sheet PS-1. Also, what size meters are going to be required? The Carlsbad Municipal Water District (CMWD) maximum meter size is 2 inch. - 2" Meter will be used, see revised PS-1. !nNT><^gNI3N3 >ObN WOdd LP:cl T00S-80-a3d Mr. Morales October 26,2000 Page 2 NACK& PEZESHKI ENGINEERING Show a Double Detector Check Valve (DDCV) assembly for the fire flow line. - See PS-1 for location and installation. 3. Please label the type ofpipe proposed for the water line (laterals) on sheet C-4 - See sheet PS-1 for information. 4. Please label the size and type ofpipe for the existing sewer and water line in Pacific Avenue on sheet C-4, as follows: Sewer = 8 inch VCP; Water = 6 inch RTAC, per DWG-133-6. Concur, see revised sheet PS-1. 5. - Please list project demand for potable water in gallons per minute (gpm), on sheet AS-l. - See revised PS-1. 6. Meet with City's Fire Marshall to determine flre flow demand in gpm. Show thisflreflow demand on sheet AS-1. - See revised PS-1. Also see attached hydraulic calculations that determine fire flow. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any comments or questions. Sincerely, Nack & Pezeshki Engineering David L. Nack, P.E. Principal cc: Anthony DePaola £0"d l.3c6£L36Pei 01 DNId33NI3N3 X3bN WQdd 8P:Zl T002-80-a3d 02/27/01 14:24 ©714 673 9267 T.B.P. 121001/002 Fax CoVer PagA Date: To: Fax* From: cc: Proj: Proj No.: #of Pages: 02/27/01 Lori|Rosenstein City of Carlsbad-Housing and Redevelopment Dept (760)720-2037 Mike Kohls, tBP/Aichitecture File 6.6 Army and Navy Academy Carlsbad, Ca 99033.00 , including this cover sheet Architeccure Flanning Maaagement tI3P/ArcIiiteciure 2300 Newport Boulevard NeNvpoii Ucach. CA. 92603 ph: 94~ 073 0300 fax: 949 673 9207 02/27/01 14:24 ©714 673 9267 T.B.P. 0002/002 February 26, 2001 Mike Kohls TBP Architecture 2300 Newport Blvd; ^ Newport Beach, CA 92663 Re; Parking Lot Improvements adjacent to NCTD Railroad ROW Dear Mr. Kohls, NCTD is in favor of slope stabilization in the NCTD Railroad ROW as required to support construction of the parking lot facility at the NW Comer of Mountain View Drive and Carlsbad Boulevard. Our understanding is that you intend to regrade eroded areas ofthe slope and place ground cover if required to provide further stabilization. As we discussed, we will not allow any permanent irrigation to be placed on the NCTD slopes. Note that we will require that your contractor obtain a "Right of Entry Pennit" from NCTD to work on the slope, which we will issue at no cost. Please keep me informed on the status ofthis project. Sincq-ely, Chip Willett General ROW Consultant City of Carlsbad Housing and Redevelopment Depaitment 2965 Rooseveit Street, Suite B., Carisbad, California 92008 Letter of Transmittal To: l^ii<e Kohis tBP/Architecture From: Lori Rosenstein City of Carisbad Housing and Redeveiopment Dept. Phone: (949)673-0300 Phone: (760) 434-2813 Fax: (949) 673-9267 Fax: (760) 720-2037 Date: March 26, 2001 Time: 9:30 AM PM RE: Army 8i Navy Academy Dormitory (RP 99-14) FORWARDED BY: HAND DELIVERY U.S. MAIL FAX COURIER PICK-UP PAGE(S) DESCRIPTION COMMENTS: I have enclosed a red-lined set of landscape plans with requested changes from our landscape plan-check staff member. Please make requested changes and submit 4 sets of revised plans to me as soon as possible so we can stay on target for the April 23^ DRB meeting. If you have any questions please contact either myself or Larry Black, City of Carlsbad Landscape Plancheck Consultant, at 760-602-4603. Thank you. Lori PLEASE RESPOND ON/OR BEFORE: COPIES TO: Citv OfCarlsbad FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL DATE: 4/13/01 TIME SENT: 10:45 a.m. No. of pages transmitted (includinq fax transmittal paqe): 1 TO: Tony DePaola FROM: Lori Rosenstein COMPANY: tBP Architecture DEPT: HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT PHONE: (949) 673-0300 PHONE #: (760) 434- 2813 FAX (949) 673-9267 FAX #: (760) 720-2037 E-MAIL #: lrose@ci.carisbad.ca.us Tony: As we discussed in our telephone conversation yesterday, I am feverishing working to complete the staff report and corresponding resolutions for the Army & Navy Academy dormitory project. I have everything I need from the other departments and time is my only constraint. The report must be reviewed by several other people including the City Attomey before I can take it forward to the Design Review Board. The next DRB meeting is April 23, 2001. At this point in time the report will not be finalized to allow for the required 10-day public notification process and 7-day review period of the Design Review Board. Therefore, the item will not be scheduled for the April 23*^^^ meeting. I realize ANA is anxious to move this project forward as quickly as possible. Therefore, I am going to try to schedule a special meeting of the DRB instead of waiting until the fourth Monday in May which is their next regularly scheduled meeting date. I apologize for the delay. I am truly doing the best I can. I will contact you once a new DRB meeting date is firmed up. In the essence of time, it is my opinion that the project should move forward very smoothly at this point and if you want to bid the project and/or submit the building plans for plancheck it is advisable to do so. This written message is for the exclusive use of the addressee and may contain confidential, privileged, and non-disclosable information. If the recipient of this message is not the addressee, or a person responsible for delivering the message to the addressee, then the recipient is prohibited from reading or using this message in any way. If you have received this message by mistake, please call us immediately and destroy the telecopy message. Housing & Redevelopment Department • 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B • Carlsbad, Califomia 92008 Citv of CSrIsbad FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL DATE: TIME SENT: WMmmmm. No. of pages transmitted (including fax transmittal page): No. of pages transmitted (including fax transmittal page): TO: KDV\\^ COMPANY: (Dept.) PHONE #: QHQ^-C^'IS'QSOO FAX #: FROM: ^^^^AeCYl DEPT: HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT PHONE #: (760) 434- 2-\\ ^ FAX#: (760)720-2037 E-MAIL #: \ V^C:) @ci.carlsbad.ca.us 3 This written message is for the exclusive use of the addressee and may contain confidential, privileged, and non-disclosable information. If the recipient of this message is not the addressee, or a person responsible for delivering the message to the addressee, then the recipient is prohibited from reading or using this message in any way. If you have received this message by mistake, please call us immediately and destroy the telecopy message. Housmg & Redevelopment Department • 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B • Carlsbad, Califomia 92008 "Large" projects: Any project which, upon its completioo will be expected to generate either an equivalent of 2,400 or more averagp^ily vehicle trips or 200 .more peak-hour vehicle trips, including large projects that may have already beehsreviewed under CEQA but require additiorial local discretionary actions, is defineo^^ a "large project" under thp^^ANDAG Congestion Management Program (Cf4P) and wili be subject t9^etThanced CEQA review as specified in the CMP. Depending upon the^somplexity of the project, the City of Carisbad reserves the right to require a traffi^r^u^y on any project. Noise Stu6yy^Must be consent with City of Carisbad Noise Guidelines Manual. Pr^^Kminary Soils/Geological Report: T^fo^(2) copies for all projects with cut or depths exceeding 5'. Completed "Project Description/Explanation" shefe^ L. Signed "Notice of Time Limits on Discretionary Applications' OTHER REQUIREMENTS Property Owners List and Address Labels: NOTE: When the application is tentatively scheduled to be heard by the decision making body, the project planner will contact the applicant and advise him to submit the radius map, two (2) sets of the prooertv owners list and labels. The applicant shall be required to sign a statement certifying that the information provicied represents the latest equalized assessment rolls from the San Diego County Assessor's Office. The project will NOT go forward until this information is received. 1. 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. 2. 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. Acceptable fonts are: Swiss 721, Enterprise TM or Courier New (TT) no larger than 11 pt. Sample labels are as follows: Form 1 3/98 Page 6 of 8 UNACCEPTABLE Mrs. Jane Smith 123 Magnolia Ave., Apt #3 Carisbad. CA 92008 • c. UNACCEPTABLE Mrs. Jane Smith 123 Magnolia Ave. Apt. #3 Carisbad, CA 92008 ACCEPTABLE MRS JANE SMITH APT 3 123 MAGNOLIA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 4. 600' Radius Map: A map to scale not less than 1" = 200' showing each lot within 600' of exterior boundaries of the subject property. Each of these lots shall be consecutively numbered and correspond with the property owners list. The scale of the map may be reduced to a scale acceptable to the Planning Director ifthe required scale is impractical. 100' Radius Occupants/Address List and Labels: For Coastal Zone projects/CDPs Only. One (1) list of the occupants/addresses located within a 100' radius of the project site; and two (2) sets of labels (as described in "A" above) ofthe addresses within a 100' radius Photographs: west. Ca Pictures of the property taken from the north, south, east and D. ^ruction materiais board and color samples: Roofing, exterior walls, texture^Spavement, glass, wood, etc. Fees: See Fee^chedule for amount SPECIFIC PROJECT REQUII lENTS For Master Plans and SpeciniSsPlans Only: 1. It is strongly recommendeoN^e appjicint meet with staff before submitting text and maps for a ma^t^r^^n or specific plan. 2. After staff and the applicant ha^e worked out the details of the master plan or specific plan a mirfmrium of twenty. (20) bound copies of the document will be reqi)irB6 prior to schedulin^he project for a public hearing. 3. Generally tl>er^ollowing information must be included ir^a. Master Plan or Specific^Plan document: Introduction Environmental Constraints Land Use and Deveiopment Standards Open Space Public Facilities and Phasing Signage B. For Density Bonus Projects: Form 1 3/98 Page 7 of 8 Lori Rosenstein - Army & Navy Academy Page 1 From: Lori Rosenstein To: Ray Patchett Subject: Army & Navy Academy Ray: The purpose of this memo is to provide you with an answer to Councilmember Finnila's question regarding the Army & Navy Academy. According to your voice mail message, Councilmember Finnila would like to know the number of resident and day students currently attending the Academy. According to the current administration, during the 2000-2001 academic year, there were 306 resident students and 22 day students. The maximum enrollment for the Academy is 350 students which may consist of any combination of resident and day students. It is the Academy's desire to have 100% resident students. I was unable to reach Councilmember Finnila directly, but 1 will keep trying. Lori Lori Rosenstein - Re: Army & Navy Academy Page 1 From: Karen Kundtz To: Lori Rosenstein; Ray Patchett Date: 7/5/01 3:32PM Subject: Re: Army & Navy Academy Lori, Ray, I am preparing a memo to the Council explaining the noticing difficulty and requesting that the item be continued to 7/24, as Ron suggested. We will also renotice the matter for 7/24. I will also send copies of the memo to you both. Thanks. Karen »> Lori Rosenstein 07/05/01 03:29PM »> Ray: As you know, one of the items on next week's City Council agenda is a new dormitory on the Army & Navy Academy site. Earlier today it was brought to my attention by Karen Tejcka, a neighbor residing across the street from the Academy on Pacific Ave., that there was an error in the public notification process. Evidently, some of the envelopes mailed to property owners and occupants in the area were delivered empty and did not contain a copy of the public notice. Both the Municipal Code and State Law mandate a 10-day public notification process, which we have not fulfilled. I have requested that the City Clerk's Office resend the all of the notices since we do not know specifically who was left out. Since we cannot possibly fulfill the 10-day public notification requirement at this late date, the Clerk's Office has advised me that we should hold off on a second notice and recommend that the Housing & Redevelopment Commission continue the public hearing to a later date. Ron Ball supports this position and recommends the item be continued to the July 24th meeting date. You will probably receive a request for a continuance from Ms. Tejcka later today. Both she and her husband were the only two neighbors to speak at the DRB meeting. She is very concerned that she is both the most objectionable neighbor to the project and one of the property owners who did not receive notifcation of the public hearing. I assured her there is no connection between the two events and this was just an unfortunate coincidence. I also informed her that only the Commission has the authority to continue the public hearing and therefore, she should attend the meeting on July 10th just to be safe. Please let me know if you have any questions regarding this matter. Lori CC: Debbie Fountain; Janice Breitenfeld; Lorraine Irving; Marty Orenyak; Ron Ball JUL-05-01 THU 04:41 PM PRIME CARE EXEC OFFICES FAX NO. 9 PRIMECARE Medical Net vv ork, Inc. P.Ol I Corporate Offices 3281 East Guasti Road, Seventh Floor Ontario, CA 91761-7643 Phone: 909/605-8044 Fax: 909/605-8031 PrimeCare Medical Group of Temecula 27699 Jefferson Avenue Temecula, CA 92590 Phone: 909/676-0171 x232 Fax: 909/694-4011 DATE: TO: CC: COMPANY: FAX NUMBER: FROM: PAGES: EXECUTIVE OFFICES Facsimile Transmittal Cover Sheet 6/05/01 Ray Patchett, City Manager Lori Rosenstein, Housing and Redevelopment Department City ofCarlsbad 760-720-9461, and 760-720-2037 Karen D. Tejcka, Vice President (including cover sheet) If all pages are not received, please call number listed above. Th mk you. MESSAGE: Please review the attached letter requesting a continuance for the hearing on the Army and Navy Academy Donnitory Privacy Notice: , JUL-05-01 THU 04:42 PM PRIME CARE EXEC OFFICES FAX NO. 9 _ P.02 July 5, 2001 Mr. Ray Patchett City IVIanager City of Carlsbad 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, California 92008 Dear Mr. Patchett; Yesterday we became aware, through neighbors, that a Notice of Public Hearing concerning the Army & Navy Academy Dormitory had been scheduled for Tuesday, July 10, 2001. We had received an empty envelope from the City of Carlsbad recently but have never received this Notice via the mail. Our neighbors also received an empty envelope from the City of Carlsbad and obtained a copy of this Notice from a next door neighbor and fortunately fonA/arded a copy to us. I have talked with Lori Rosenstein of the Housing and Redevelopment Department and discussed this issue with her. 1 am requesting that a continuance for this hearing be granted so that all neighbors, per the guidelines you set, are ensured notification. It is unknown how many neighbors received similar empty envelopes. Even if the Notices are remailed at this date, the neighbors will not receive them until Saturday or Monday, which are only one to three days before the hearing. This is an inadequate notice period. Please provide me with information on how this request will be handled. 1 can be reached at my home at 760-434-2550 where you may leave a message, via my cellular phone at 760-612-0460 or via facsimile at 760-434-5187. Sincerely, 'y. / Karen D. Tejcka / / 202 Pacific Ave, W Carlsbad, CA 92008 cc: Lori Rosenstein JUL-23-01 MON 03:25 PM PRIME CARE EXEC OFFICES FAX NO. 9 P.Ol PRIMECARE Medical Network, Inc I RECeVEO JUL 23 2001 Corporate Offices 3281 East Guasti Road, Seventh Floor Ontario, CA 91761-7643 Phone: 909/605-8044 Fax: 909/605-8031 PrimeCare Medical Group of Temecula 27699 Jefferson Avenue Temecula, CA 92590 Phone: 909/676-0171 x232 Fax: 909/694-4011 DATE: TO; COMPANY: FAX NUMBER: FROM: PAGES: EXECUTIVE OFFICES Facsimile Transmittal Cover Sheet 7/20/01 Carisbad City Council Members Mr. Patchett, Carlsbad City Manager Lori Rosenstein, Carlsbad Housing and Redevelopment Department Colonel Steve Miller, President, Army and Navy Academy Various Various Karen D. Tejcka, Vice President 4 (including cover sheet) If all pages are not received, please call number listed above. Thank you. MESSAGE: Attached please fmd a letter in response to RP 99-14/DCP 99-49 - Army and Navy Academy Dormitory requesting that the City Council require modifications to the plans as presented and approved by the Design Review Board. We will be presenting our views at the City Council meeting and will provide the signed petitions from local residents as well. JUL-23-01 MON 03:26 PM PRIME CARE EXEC OFFICES FAX NO. 9 P.U^ July 20, 2001 Carlsbad City Council 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, California 92008 Re: RP 99-14/DCP 99-49 - Army & Navy Academy Dormitory Dear City Council members: This project has been called a "Motel 6" by a Design Review Board member. This letter will outline why we oppose the current plans for this project and what modifications are important to create in order to satisfy neighbor and homeowner concerns. We reside at 202 Pacific Ave, directly across the street from this dormitory complex, for the past 11 years. A dormitory housing 80 boys, with large windows facing a quiet residential street is inappropriate for the neighborhood. Consider the issues: Incompatibility with Neighborhood; • Ail homes or apartments are singie family or small apartments surrounding the immediate area. There is a "village" feel to the area, which is one of the many reasons why we moved to the area. • The A & N Academy dormitory built on the south side of the campus - on Cypress Street - would be very similar to the one being built facing Pacific Ave. It has very large windows providing full on views of students in the rooms, and allowing full on views of residents across the street. There are extremely bright lights emanating from the rooms and from the security lights on the buildings. • Newly constructed buildings of this size are not compatible with residential communities and have not been located across the street from smail residential homes in the immediate vicinity within the Carlsbad Village area. These buildings include the dormitory of A&N on Cypress Street, and the Lutheran retirement facility, (The residential home across the street from it Is used by the A&N Academy). • There are multi-million dollar homes within a half block from this building referred to as a "Motel 6" by one of the individuals who has already approved the plans for this project at the Design Review Board level. • Traffic In the village has already increased substantially in the last few years in particular. There are actually traffic jams on Carlsbad Boulevard on the weekends and some weekdays. The dormitories would only serve to add to this problem. Widening of Pacific Avenue can only serve to add to this growing problem. • The recent building approval of a three story, three unit condominium on the corner of Pacific Ave and Ocean Ave, approved by a 4-3 vote, has disturbed many neighbors. It is the sentiment of most neighbors that this building does not fit into the neighborhood, adds unneeded density to it and received variances which were clearly outside the scope of what is appropriate. Adding another, much denser building within a Vz block ofthis site in the neighborhood just further justifies the opinions that Carlsbad is only pro-growth and does not serve the needs of existing homeowners. • Property values in this neighborhood are sure to decline with the addition of this building. Certainly, disclosures to potential buyers of surrounding properties to the A & N Academy would need to include the noise, security and privacy issues that such a building would create. Security and Noise Concerns: • Currently, there are many security and noise problems that have existed throughout the time period we have owned our home. Unfortunately, we have found that the A&N Academy in 1 JUL-23-01 MON 03:27 PM PRIME CARE EXEC OFFICES FAX NO. 9 LM. Cadsbad City Council, p. 2 • the past has put forth little effort to improve these issues, nor rectify the problems as they occur, even after repeated attempts to resolve such problems. During the Design Review Board meeting however, we did receive encouragement from an A & N staff member to call them when these issues arise. Incidents include rocks being thrown through a car window with verbal threats being made to the neighbor owning the vehicle, car vandalism, golf clubs, golf balls, and other heavy objects being thrown frequently into yards (with one nearly missing a 4 month olds head), students walking around the premises in their underwear in full view of neighbors, very frequent yelling screaming, and other disruptive behavior, cars cruising the neighborhood, students sneaking out of windows, yelling out of windows, playing music loudly with the windows open, a "SWAT* like environment with a helicopter that circles overhead (for one of the many summer camping experiences for students), etc. • Adding an additional 80 students to live across the street from residential homes wili only increase this problem. Several of the neighbors have young girls who live in this neighborhood, one of whom receives frequent cat-calling and other inappropriate comments from these students. • Being able to see into 40 young men's rooms at any given time (those facing Pacific Avenue), and for them to be able to see out and interact with anyone passing by, given the large windows, bright lights and lack of frequent and direct supervision is unacceptable for a small quiet neighborhood to endure. • The noise issues, including the daily loud revelle and taps music, as well as frequent and loud announcements (some lasting 2 minutes) to all students throughout the morning, day and evening hours, starting at 6 am and going to 11 p.m. at times has been a consistent complaint of neighbors. This has continued without abatement by the A&N Academy, despite frequent complaints and requests to change. Unconsidered suooestions to modify to fit neighborhood needs The following is a list of suggestions that were made in the Design Review Board meeting that were not discussed and not acted upon; • Reduce the size of the building • Reduce the density of the number of students within the building • Face the dormitory building to the inside of the campus, so that there were no windows facing onto Pacific Avenue. • Move the dormitory to the west side of campus, where the dormitory would not be located across the street from homes. • Building a 1-story property instead of 2 story. • Create windows that were much smaller, were inescapable and were made of glass in which peopie couid not see in and out. Other dormitories on this campus already have this type of window. This suggestion was discussed briefly in the Design Review Board meeting but no requirements were made of the A & N Academy. • Outdoor lighting that will consistentiy light up the neighborhood. This was discussed at the Design Review Board meeting but no requirements were made of the A & N Academy. In conclusion, this large densely built dormitory does not meet the needs of a quiet residential neighborhood. While the A&N dormitory recentiy built facing Cypress Street was allowed to have been built, a dormitory as planned to be sited on the North side of the campus would be located in a very different environment and is not compatible to the local neighborhood. Consider whether you would want to live across the street from a building considered to be a "Motel Six" that houses 80 boys, where 20 boys used to live. Exponential increases in security, noise, traffic, and density problems are what you would look forward to. We uroe vou to vote no on the approval ofthis oroiect and seek modifications listed below. This list has been developed in conjunction with a neighborhood meeting that took place to assess Input from residents who live in the near vicinity. There are also petitions that have been signed by local residents outlining the same requests. JUL-23-01 MON 03:28 PM PRIME CARE EXEC OFFICES FAX NO. 9 P.04 Carlsbad City Council, p. 3 Requests bv Neighbors and Homeowners to modifv the buildina plans for the A & N Academv dormitorv • Reduce the size of the windows, locate them near the ceiling, and make them of obscure glass, as last presented by the architect ofthe building. • Eliminate direct outdoor lighting on sides of the buildings. • Redesign the staircases so that they are inside the building or are enclosed on the outside of the building. • Require a written agreement be signed by November 1,2001 between the City of Carlsbad, the A & N Academy and neighbors who reside on Pacific Avenue that will outline the prevention of noise, privacy and security issues and how they will be ameliorated when they occur. Karen D. Tejcka George J. Caracciolo 202 Pacific Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 cc: Lori Rosenstein, Housing and Redevelopment Department Colonel Steve Miller, President, Army and Navy Academy Transmittal Date: To: Attn: Proj: 08/08/01 City of Carlsbad - Housing and Redevelopment Department 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B. Carisbad, Ca 92008 Debbie Fountain, Lori Rosenstein Army / Navy Academy: Bldg #CB010286, Fire #010285 Architecture Planning Interiors Management 99033.00 n/a Mike Kohls, tBP/Architecture File 6.6 Pro) No.: DSA No.: From: cc: Signature: Transmitting I Change Orders • I Prints I 11 Construction Docs I I I Specifications • | Copy of Letter • I Submittal [Zl I Under Separate Cover I I I Shop Drawings RECEIVED AUG Or) 2001 CITY OF CARLSBAD HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT jZUI Samples I 11 Preliminary Drawings I 11 Diskettes n I Other Qty Description (2) sets proposed street elevation (1) landscape architect planting proposal Message Karen, Lori we will incorporate the changes when approved in the first change order if this is o.k. with you. Plans have been resubmitted for final approval and we are looking at a AUG. 15 START DATE if you have any additional questions feel free to call me thanks, Mike • • • • • For Your Use Approved as Corrected Approved Correct & Return For Approval Please Return U.P.S. nl U.P.S. Overnight n I U.P.S. 2"'' Day • I Fed Ex • • • • O.C.B. Deiivery tBP Deiivery U.S. IVIail tBP-Architecture 2300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach. CA. 92663 ph: 949 673 0300 tax: 949 6.-3 926" FROM : LAND PRCHITECTURE FftX NQ. : 949 497 7507 lug. 07 2001 11:47PM Pl Land Architecture tBP Architects 2300 Newport Blvd; Newport Beach, CA 92663 ATT'N; Mi chae 1 Kohls p£; Army & Navy Academy, Carlsbad, Ca. RECEIVED m 02001 CITY OF CARLSBAD HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AugLLSt 7, 2001 Job Nr. 1057 Dear Mike, After my telephone conversation with Debby Fountain of the City of Carisbad it was agreed: 1. All u-ees remain as specified. 2. Along lhe required 4' high W. L fence; add 1 - 5 gal BOUGAINVILLEA "BARBARA FCARST" @. 15* O. C. and train to fence. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, Peter Wei.^brod, ASLA Landscape Architect 1620 THURSTON DRIVE • LACUNA BEACH, CA 92651 TEiypAX (949) 497-7507 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • LAND PUNNING • STATE LICENSE NO. 12S2 Citv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department August 15, 2001 MIKE KOHLS TBP ARCHITECTURE 2300 NEWPORT BLVD NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 SUBJECT: ARMY & NAVY ACADEIVIY DORIVIITORY (RP99-14/CDP99-49) Dear Mike: The Housing & Redevelopment Department has received the revised colored elevations for the new Army & Navy Academy Dormitory on the south side of Pacific Avenue. I have reviewed the plans along with Housing & Redevelopment Director Debbie Fountain. As you know, the Housing & Redevelopment Commission approved the project with the condition that the north facing building facade be redesigned to provide more landscaping and building articulation to the satisfaction of the Housing & Redevelopment Director. The following issues must be addressed prior to the Housing & Redevelopment Director making a final decision on the design: 1. On the site plan, please indicate the location of the wrought iron fence/wall in relation to the building and the front property line. 2. On the building elevations, please clarify that the total heiqht of the fence, including the 2-foot high perimeter wall, will not exceed a maximum of 5 feet as measured from exterior grade. 3. The revised colored elevations do not indicate the buildings will be "pure white" as indicated on the color and materials board presented to the Housing & Redevelopment Commission. The colored elevations must be modified to accurately show the proposed building colors. In addition, corresponding sample chips of materials and colors shall be submitted to the Housing & Redevelopment Department so there is no question as to what the final building colors will be. 4. The revised colored elevations, which are being submitted for final approval, must accurately depict the proposed vegetation along the north side of the building. This landscaping must be consistent with the final landscape plan. The preliminary landscape plan indicates the placement of 8 15-gallon New Zealand Christmas Trees along Pacific Avenue. Staff supports modifying the landscape plan to replace the New Zealand Christmas Trees with the planting of larger canopy trees as shown on the revised colored elevations. However, the trees must be of a species that result in the height and fullness indicated on the 2965 Roosevelt St.. Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 Army & Navy Academy RP99-14/CDP99-49 8/15/01 Page 2 colored elevations and the final landscape plan must be modified accordingly. 5. Floors plans must be modified to clearly indicate window recesses and tower projections as shown on revised elevations. 6. It appears the proposed changes to the building facade and landscaping will necessitate subsequent changes to the following building plan sheets: site plan, floor plan, building elevations, and final landscape plan. It is advisable to hold off making these changes to the building plans until you receive final design approval from the Housing & Redevelopment Director. 7. Finally, please note that as a condition of approval, a reproducible 24" x 36" mylar of the final site plan must be submitted to the Housing & Redevelopment Department prior to the issuance of the building permit. Once again, it is advisable to wait until you receive final approval on the building plans before creating the mylar. Please contact my office at (760) 434-2813 if you have any questions regarding the information contained in this letter. Sincerelj LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst c: Debbie Fountain, Housing & Redevelopment Director Citv of barisbad FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL DATE: 8/15/01 TIME SENT: 3:45 D.m. No. of pages transmitted (includinq fax transmittal paqe): 3 TO: Mike Kohls FROM: Lori Rosenstein COMPANY: tBP Architecture DEPT: HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT PHONE: (949) 673-0300 PHONE #: (760) 434- 2813 FAX (949) 673-9267 FAX #: (760) 720-2037 E-MAIL #: lrose@ci.carlsbad.ca.us Mike: Please see attached response to revised building elevations and call me to discuss. Thanks, Lori This written message is for the exclusive use of the addressee and may contain confidential, privileged, and non-disclosable information. If the recipient of this message is not the addressee, or a person responsible for delivering the message to the addressee, then the recipient is prohibited from reading or using this message in any way. If you have received this message by mistake, please call us immediately and destroy the telecopy message. Housing & Redevelopment Department • 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B • Carlsbad, Califomia 92008 AUG. 13.2001 11:00m DfiTfiSMITH/FPILPROOF NO.951 P. 1/6 Facsimile Transmittal Cover Sheet DATE: 08/13/2001 TO: Deborah Fountain Lori Rosenstein COMPANY: City of Carlsbad Housing and Redevelopment CC: Colonel Steven Miller, Army & Navy Academy Ray Patchett, City of Carlsbad John Crean, Army & Navy Academy Council Members, City of Carlsbad PHONE: 760-434-2811 FAX: 760-720-2037 FROM: Karen D. Tejcka PAGES: 5 (Including cover sheet) (if all pages are not received, please call 760-434-5187. Thankyou.) MESSAGE: Please see attached 5 page facsimile correspondence //.•28AM _ Oe&lblB ftolJTAlM N^*''^^ t-™-- ^ ^ ^^^^ PUG. 13.2001 li:0im DflTfiSMITH/FfilLPROOF NO.951 K.^^/b August 7, 2001 Ms. Deborah Fountain Director, City of Carlsbad - Housing and Redevelopment Department 2965 Roosevelt St., Suite B Carlsbad.CA 92008 Dear Ms. Thank you for the work your staff has done In regard to our concerns on the proposed Dormitory and other Master Plan Issues at the Army and Navy Academy, We were, of course, disappointed In the Council decision, especially in light of the severity of the issues described by neighbors. We are left only with the hope that your City Development office and Engineering Department will follow the Council guidance regarding landscaping and structural enhancements that may ameliorate our concems. Piease note that our basic position Is that we want the Academy to have new dormitories and we certainly want the appearance of the Academy property along Pacific Avenue to Improve. As stated by neiy>(bors on previous occasions, we support the Academy and their mission. The two-story dormitory can potentially help with the noise that comes off the Academy property at all hours ofthe night and day. However, and perhaps not fully explained in our comments before the Council, we don't think large, clear, unsecured windows are appropriate for minimally supervised teenage boys living in a facility across the street from homes housing teenage and younger girls and on a well traveled street ending at beach property. Moreover, having lived with the current landscaping along the Academy property abutting Pacific Avenue and Mountain View, we believe the city must insist on and direct the Academy to establish a tall, green belt along both arteries to serve as both noise abatement, visual blockage of students and neighbors from one another, and visual enhancement of the facility. Frankly, we have diminished confidence In the Academy following through in the many requests and recommendations the neighbors or the City Council has made regarding privacy, security, noise, lack of supervision of students and the appearance ofthe new buildings and landscaping that could work to reduce these problems. We believe each element the neighbors were concemed about should have been considered before the final plans were drawn and brought to the Design Review Board and indeed, before the one meeting the Academy had with neighbors. In talking with neighbors, it is apparent that neighbors did not know of the master planning activities that occurred In 1995 and if they had, obviously would have presented their concerns during the master planning process. We suggest that you review your policies and procedures to clarify what is required of applicants who complete master plans and requfre documentation of all that occurred with the neighbors who would be impacted by such plans. Specifically, how many neighbors are contacted, how were they contacted, what specific input did they make, what changes were made to the plans to comply with neighbors requests and what documentation is required to prove what the applicant says Is accurate to this effect. It was fascinating to see a very large new housing development that was presented at the City Council meeting on July 24* work to establish the trust of ii'-, local neighbors and thus receive simple approval from the City Council, while a much smaller proiect could not accomplish this. You may recall that the City Council meeting to review and approve the Academy's dormitory was scheduled for July 10*^. I had requested that It be postponed to the July 24''' meeting since It was found that the two homeowners who had attended the Design Review Board meeting somehow did not receive notices in the mail from the City on the City Council hearing date to review the proposal. Instead, we received blank envelopes firom the City. One wonders what checks and balances exist to assure that the rights of local community members are preserved as are the rights of the individuals bringing building projects before the City. Our list of concerns go to the heart of our long temn core concems about security and discipline among the 80 or so young men who will be living with reduced and minimal supervision but fully exposed within 60 feet of our homes. Your staff might recall Mr. Bloomquist saying the Academy accepts as adequate a system of student supervision wherein most of the night and morning supervision Is done by the boys themselves. What we see as a result Is a rather constant cycle of out of control young men demonstrating frequently inappropriate behavior as cited at length in my last letter. Meanwhile, we Involuntarily listen to inane and repetitive announcements over an antiquated but very loud PA system going from 6 am to 11 pm, that interrupts sleep, telephone conversations and television AUG. 13.2001 11:03m DPiTnSMITH/FPlILPROOF NO. 951 P. 3/6 Fountain, p. 2 viewing. We will be following up with the City Attorney who has stated that there are noise ordinances in Carlsbad. We have been told previously by the police department that none exists, except for those related to constmction. Please note that the Academy at this point appears short in leadership—Steve Miller Is no longer President and was appointed Superintendent with reduced responsibility and authority; the VP, Richard Hannasch has recently lefl; and Tom Bloomquist, Dean of Academics has resigned as Dean and has taken a job with Carlsbad High School. While I was encouraged to receive the recent letter from Mr. Bloomquist (as enclosed), it Is unfortunate we were not able to work with him before he departed. All three Individuals have been present at various meetings with the City Council and the Design Review Board. We are left wondering who will be making decisions at the Academy that will be long standing, neighbor friendly and supports the views ofthe City Council. Please be clear on what we ask—simply insist the conditions you attached to your approval of the Academy dormitory project are in fact specified In the permit and met by the Academy. Specifically: • Please insist that the windows on the North face are secured and frosted to prevent the forty boys living on that side ofthe building from demonstrating further inappropriate behavior to the young girls and passersby along Pacific Avenue. The Academy Architect's Idea of having the windows extend to 8'2" and open from the top simply does not address our concerns about privacy and decency. • Please also insist that the landscaping results in a row of mature trees and high shrubbery aiong Pacific instead ofthe "Motel 61sh Wall of White and Glass" portrayed in the rendering. • We also are disappointed that there was no change made on the temporary staircases that the neighbors had requested be eliminated. Although considered "temporary", It Is to remain until a new domriltory is built next door, with an unknown timetable for construction. This staircase will encourage students to congregate in areas that will impact the neighbors. Please insist that this staircase be removed from the final plans. • We do hope that the lights that the Academy has said they will use will be ones that do not light up the neighborhood at night any more than what currently occurs. Please insist that these lights be ones that are consistent with the neighbor's requests. In order to insure satisfactory closure and fairness to all concerned In this matter, we, the neighbors of the Academy along Pacific Avenue, are requesting to be included in discussions and reviews of proposed solutions that meet the Council's guidance. We will be out of town and will retum on August 20'\ We will be picking up messages and would encourage you to call us to set up a time fbr our first meeting. We wll! work to ensure that the neighbors are In attendance. My work telephone is 909-605-8044, which is the best piace to leave messages during our absence. I will return your call as soon as I receive it. We look fonA/ard to your response to our request. Thank you again for your time and consideration Sincerely. (jULlU^oto Karen D. Tejcka George J. Caracciolo 202 Pacific Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 Home: 760-545-2550 Work; 909-605-8044 cc: Colonel Steven Miller, Superintendant, Army and Navy Academy City Council Members Ray Patchett, City Manager Lori Rosenstein, Housing and Redevelopment Department John Crean, President, Arniy and Navy Academy Neighbors residing on or near Pacific Avenue End: 3 articles from local newspapers on the City Council's actions regarding the Academy dormitory Letter from Tom Bloomquist, prior Dean of Academics, Army and Navy Academy AUG.13.2001 11•04fiM DATASMITH/FAILPROOF NO.951 P. 4/6 kg B ^ e If g os^* f.||.asa.||.||1g' ^ ties ^13 31 ?» ^ 2 rt p p ^ flj j ^i- ll "3 i-s It ifli 5 I s 5^ e I g p 5- 9si o I' TO pup-? »J- p o ^ a J5 o 2., M P (Up) O O OJEL 2 2 B'S.S 8 2" £ o 5^ 5 « I-t fP O tfl S £ £P D. <^ iT> rr OJ s* 5 « ^ ff! B> tu <V S AUG.13.2001 11:06AM DATASMITH/FAILPROOF NO.951 P. 5/6 11 •§5 s S I I' Jl 1 33 IfM I » S ^ B 8 AUG.13.2001 11:08AM DATASMITH/Fft ILPROOF NO.951 P. 6/6 AKMY AND NAVY AC^ADEiMV Inspiring Excellence Since 1910 July 25, 2001 Mrs. Karen Tejcka 202 Pacific Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dear Karen, While I know the meeting last night did not go as you had hoped I want you to know that I was serious about what I said last night. Before I leave the Academy I will stress to the administration the importance of developing and maintaining better relationships with our neighbors. I believe too that COL Miller has the same Intentions. I think that a meeting at the beginning ofthe year, perhaps after the first two hectic weeks of the school year, would be beneficial for both the school and the residents. If when 1 leave and this has not been set up I recommend you do the following; When a problem arises call COL Tom Matchin. He Is the commandant of cadets and is the first contact person you should have. His extension is 219. If you don't here back from him within 24 hours I would call COL Miller at extension 207. At times throughout the year various administrators are at conferences or workshops and calling back within 24 hours is not possible. If you have not heard from either person my recommendation would be to walk on campus and see if you can set up a time to meet with one of the administrators. I tnjIy appreciate your position and even more, your kind and professional manner in voicing your opinion. Good luck in trying to resolve the issues that you have mentioned. Sincerely, Tom Bloomquist Dean of Academics Cc: COL Miller; COL Matchin Post OfTicc Box 3000 Carlsbad, CA 92018 (760) 729-2385 Fax (760) 434-1890 www.annyandnavyacaclcmy.org Citv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department August 16, 2001 KAREN TEJCKA GEORGE CARACCIOLO 202 PACIFIC AVENUE CARLSBAD, CA. 92008 RE: ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY DORMITORY Dear Ms. Tejcka and Mr. Caracciolo: Thank you very much for your letter of August 13, 2001 regarding the Donnitory Building which was recently approved for the Army and Navy Academy. I was not present at the subject Housing and Redevelopment Commission. However, I did receive a briefing about the meeting and reviewed the minutes which included the detailed discussion of the project and the direction provided by the Commission as part of their approval. As I mentioned in my telephone message to you on August 15th, staff has already discussed the required plan revisions with Army and Navy Academy and they are in the process of finalizing their plans in order to obtain building permits for the subject project. I appreciate your comments and I believe I understand your concems related to the operations of the Academy. Although I do not believe that it was appropriate to delay a decision on the redesign of the project until you retumed from vacation, I do want you to know that our office did attempt to address your various concems in our requirements for the redesign. Army and Navy Academy has been required to provide for better articulation on the north elevation of the building and to provide enhanced landscaping. Army and Navy Academy will provide full size, mature trees on the north side of the dormitory building. I believe that these mature trees will help to provide a buffer between the residents in your neighborhood and the dormitory. Also, the Academy will provide for a 2 foot block wall with 3 feet of wrought iron fence for the full length of the dormitory building. Landscaping will be added to this fence/wall to provide for more color to enhance the area. I believe that the additional building articulation, building color variations, the addition of the wall/fence, and the enhanced landscaping will help to address the aesthetics of the project. It is disappointing that the Academy staff has not been more responsive to you and your neighbors when issues are raised regarding operations of the Academy and behavior of the cadets. I hope that your recent comments will be taken by the Academy staff and acted upon. Our office will continue to remind them of their commitment to improve their operations and supervision of the cadets/students. I encourage you also to continue to voice your concems with the Academy Staff. I agree with you that the changing leadership which has plagued the Academy for the last 5 to 10 years is a problem. Each new administration has new ideas and plans for the best methods for continued operation of the Academy. It is my understanding that 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 @ K. Tejcka 8/16/2001 Page 2 the Academy intends to remain a part of the community for many years to come. As a result, it will be important for you and your neighbors to be consistent in your effort to establish a productive dialogue with the Academy staff to address your operational concems. In response to your specific design requests, I offer the following comments: • Secured and Frosted Windows - From a fire safety and building code standpoint, the City can't agree to require that the north facing windows be completely secure. Staff is also not supportive of the frosted windows. We believe that this could result in a more institutional appearance for the building rather than less which is more desirable. We believe the windows compromise proposed by the Army and Navy Academy is acceptable. As I mentioned above, I also believe that the mature trees will help to provide the desired privacy for the neighbors. • Mature Trees and High Shmbbery - As mentioned, we are requiring mature trees. Rather than high shmbbery, we are requiring a wall/fence with attractive landscaping which includes color. We hope the neighbors will find this to be satisfactory. Staff believes the revised plans are more attractive. • Staircase Removal - The subject staircase is not actually temporary. It, however, is temporarily open to the outside. When the additional dormitory is built, it will be enclosed. Although your concem is understood, for building code and safety reasons, this staircase can't be eliminated. It is needed for exiting purposes. • Lighting - A condition of project approval requires that lighting be designed to have a minimal impact on neighboring residents while also maintaining security for the Academy. The condition requires the neighbors to be shielded from the lighting. Thank you again for your comments. I hope this correspondence adequately addresses your concems. Although I am unable to accommodate your request for the residents to be involved in the redesign of the dormitory building, you are welcome to review the plans for the redesign upon your retum from vacation. If you have any questions or additional comments, you may contact my office at (760) 434-2935 or Lori Rosenstein at (760) 434-2813. DEBBIE FOUNTAIN Housing and Redevelopment Director C: City Manager City Council AUG.13.2001 li:01AM DATASMITH/FAILPROOF NU.ybl K.d/b August 7,2001 Ms. Deborah Fountain Director, City of Carisbad - Housing and Redevelopment Department 2965 Roosevelt St., Suite B Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dear Ms. Thank you for the work your staff has done in regard to our concerns on the proposed Dormitory and other Master Plan Issues at the Mmy and Navy Academy. We were, of course, disappointed In the Council decision, especially In light of the severity of the Issues described by neighbors. We are left only with the hope that your City Development office and Engineering Department will follow the Council guidance regarding landscaping and structural enhancements that may ameliorate our concerns. Please note that our basic position is that we want the Academy to have new dormitories and we certainly want the appearance of the Academy property along Pacific Avenue to improve. As stated by neitfibors on previous occasions, we support the Academy and their mission. The two-story domnitory can potentially help with the noise that comes off the Academy property at all hours of the night and day. However, and perhaps not fully explained in our comments before the Councii, we don't think large, clear, unsecured windows are appropriate for minimally supervised teenage boys living in a facility across the street from homes housing teenage and younger girls and on a well traveled street ending at beach property. Moreover, having lived with the current landscaping along the Academy property abutting Pacific Avenue and Mountain View, we believe the city must insist on and direct the Academy to establish a tall, green belt along both arteries to serve as both noise abatement, visual blockage of students and neighbors from one another, and visual enhancement of the facility. Frankly, we have diminished confidence In the Academy following through in the many requests and recommendations the neighbors or the City Council has made regarding privacy, security, noise, lack of supervision of students and the appearance ofthe new buildings and landscaping that could work to reduce these problems. We believe each element the neighbors were concemed about should have been considered before the final plans were drawn and brought to the Design Review Board and indeed, before the one meeting the Academy had with neighbors. In talking with neighbors, it is apparent that neighbors did not know of the master planning activities that occurred in 1995 and if they had, obviously would have presented their concerns during the master planning process. We suggest that you review your policies and procedures to clarify what is required of applicants who complete master plans and require documentation of all that occurred with the neighbors who would be impacted by such plans. Specifically, how many neighbors are contacted, how were they contacted, what specific input did they make, what changes were made to the plans to comply with neighbors requests and what documentation is required to prove what the applicant says is accurate to this effect. It was fascinating to see a very large new housing development that was presented at the City Council meeting on July 24*^^ work to establish the trust of local neighbors and thus receive simple approval from the City Council, while a much smaller project could not accomplish this. You may recall that the City Council meeting to review and approve the Academy's donnitory was scheduled for July 10"^. I had requested that It be postponed to the July 24'" meeting since It was found that the two homeowners who had attended the Design Review Board meeting somehow did not receive notices In the mail from the City on the City Council hearing date to review the proposal. Instead, we received blank envelopes from the City. One wonders what checks and balances exist to assure that the rights of local community members are preserved as are the rights of the individuals bringing building projects before the City. Our list of concerns go to the heart of our long temi core concems about security and discipline among the 80 or so young men who will be living with reduced and minimal supervision but fully exposed within 60 feet of our homes. Your staff might recall Mr. Bloomquist saying the Academy accepts as adequate a system of student supervision wherein most of the night and moming supervision is done by the boys themselves. What we see as a result Is a rather constant cycle of out of control young men demonstrating frequently inappropriate behavior as cited at length in my last letter. Meanwhile, we involuntarily listen to inane and repetitive announcements over an antiquated but very loud PA system going from 6 am to 11 pm, that Interrupts sleep, telephone conversations and television AUG.13.2001 11:03AM DATASMITH/FAILPROOF NO.951 P. 3/6 Fountain, p. 2 viewing. We will be following up with the City Attorney who has stated that there are noise ordinances in Carlsbad. We have been told previously by the police department that none exists, except for those related to constmction. Please note that the Academy at this point appears short in leadership—Steve Miller is no longer President and was appointed Superintendent with reduced responsibility and authority; the VP, Richard Hannasch has recently left; and Tom Bloomquist, Dean of Academics has resigned as Dean and has taken a job with Carlsbad High School. While I was encouraged to receive the recent letter from Mr. Bloomquist (as enclosed), it Is unfortunate we were not able to work with him before he departed. All three individuals have been present at various meetings with the City Council and the Design Review Board. We are left wondering who will be making decisions at the Academy that wiil be (ong standing, neighbor friendly and supports the views ofthe City Council. Please be clear on what we ask—simply insist the conditions you attached to your approval of the Academy donnitory project are in fact specified In the permit and met by the Academy. Specifically: • Please insist that the windows on the North face are secured and frosted to prevent the forty boys IMng on that side ofthe building from demonstrating further inappropriate behavior to the young giris and passersby aiong Pacific Avenue. The Academy Architect's idea of having the windows extend to 8'2" and open from the top simply does not address our concems about privacy and decency. • Please also insist that the landscaping results in a row of mature trees and high shruLSiery along Pacific instead of the "Motel 61sh Wall of White and Glass" portrayed in the rendering. • We also are disappointed that there was no change made on the temporary staircases that the neighbors had requested be eliminated. Although considered 'lemporary", it Is to remain until a new donnitory is built next door, with an unknown timetable for construction. This staircase will encourage students to congregate in areas that will impact the neighbors. Please Insist that this staircase be removed from the final plans. • We do hope that the lights that the Academy has said they will use will be ones that do not light up the neighborhood at night any more than what currently occurs. Please insist that these lights be ones that are consistent with the neighbor's requests. In order to insure satisfactory closure and faimess to all concemed in this matter, we, the neighbors of the Academy along Pacific Avenue, are requesting to be included In discussions and reviews of proposed solutions that meet the Council's guidance. We will be out of town and will retum on August 20'^ We will be picking up messages and would encourage you to call us to set up a time fbr our first meeting. We wili work to ensure that the neighbors are In attendance. My work telephone is 909-605-8044, which is the best place to leave messages during our absence. I will return your call as soon as I receive It. We look fonward to your response to our request. Thank you again for your time and consideration Sincerely, Karen D. Tejcka George J. Caracciolo 202 Pacific Avenue Carisbad, Caiifomia 92008 Home: 760-545-2550 Work: 909-605-8044 cc: Colonel Steven Miller, Superintendant, Army and Navy Academy City Council Members Ray Patchett, City Manager Lori Rosenstein, Housing and Redevelopment Department John Crean, President, fsxmy and Navy Academy Neighbors residing on or near Pacific Avenue End: 3 articles from local newspapers on the City Council's actions regarding the Academy donnitory Letter from Tom Bloomquist, prior Dean of Academics, Anny and Navy Academy AUG.13.2001 11 = 04AM DATASMITH/FAILPROOF NO.951 P. 4/8 Ilr ill 1 r -I liiiliil rt Oft o 5 d • 5a 5 p O " C ,flf! 3 cuo$ <p B-3 II lillili J*w 2.5? 9 P i'9on S< s*5 S <0 «^ O «d 5 " !S Si-" is •-h a* 5i» r OJ ^ cv a o W ^ M. <« o pu <A H (V P BIS o J 6 to to o n p^rt S* I S CO Q c« B'S ^ cp*n> „ M. p fij tr rt< ^ •I ^ AUG.13.2001 11:06AM DATASMITH/FAILPROOF NO.ybl P. b/b 2 R ! •gs n n I a. S TO s I li l!1 S Pl 5 it •Is .5- III II. ^111-^; III 4 R't^n'^ B ic i 9 n I on D cr AUG.13.2001 11:08AM DATASMITH/FAILPROOF NO.951 P. 6/6 ARMY ANI> NAVY ACADEMY Inspiring Excellence Since 1910 July 25, 2001 Mrs. Karen Tejcl^a 202 Pacific Ave Carlsbad. CA 92008 Dear Karen, While i l<now the meeting last night did not go as you had hoped I want you to l<now that I was serious about what I said last night. Before I leave the Academy I wii! stress to the administration the importance of developing and maintaining better relationships with our neighbors. I believe too that COL Miller has the same intentions. I think that a meeting at tbe beginning ofthe year, perhaps after the first two hectic weeks of the school year, would be beneficial for both the school and the residents. If When 1 leave and this has not been set up I recommend you do the following: When a problem arises call COL Tom Matchin. He is the commandant of cadets and is the first contact person you should have. His extension is 219. If you don't here back from him within 24 hours I wouid call COL Miller at extension 207. At times throughout the year various administrators are at conferences or workshops and calling back within 24 hours is not possible. If you have not heard from either person my recommendation would be to walk on campus and see if you can set up a time to meet with one of the administrators. I tally appreciate your position and even more, your kind and professional manner in voicing your opinion. Good luck in trying to resolve the issues that you have mentioned. Sincerely, Tom Bloomquist Dean of Academics Cc: COL Miller; COL Matchin Post Office Box 3000 Carlsbad, CA 92018 (760) 729-2385 Fax (760) 434-1890 www.annyandnavyacadcmy.org Citv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department August 15, 2001 BILL PONDER CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION SAN DIEGO DISTRICT 7575 METROPOLITAN DRIVE, SUITE 103 SAN DIEGO, CA 92108-4402 Re: Notice of Final Action for Army & Navy Academy Dormitory (RP 99-14/CDP 99-49) Dear Bill: Attached, please find a Notice of Final Action for the above referenced project. I have also included a set of plans, a copy of the report that went to the Housing & Redevelopment Commission, and the resolution of approvai. If you have any questions pertaining to the enclosed documents or require additional information, piease contact me at 760-434-2813. LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst Enclosures 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 @ Citv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT The following project is located within the City of Carlsbad Coastal Zone. A coastal permit application for the project has been acted upon. Application #: RP 99-14 Case Name: Armv & Navy Academv Dormitorv Applicant: Armv & Navy Academy Address: 2605 Carlsbad Blvd.. Carlsbad 92008 Phone: 760-729-2385 Filing Date: 9/29/99 Decision Date: 7/24/01 Agent (if different): tBP Architecture Address: 2300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Phone: 949-673-0300 ACTION: • • APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS DENIED (Copy of final resolution is sent to: Coastal Commission, any persons who specifically requested it, and the applicant). COASTAL COMMISSION APPEAL STATUS; I I NOT APPEALABLE TO THE COASTAL COMMISSION. I I APPEALABLE TO THE COASTAL COMMISSION pursuant to Coastal Act Section 30603. An aggrieved person may appeal this decision to the Coastal Conamission within ten (10) working days following Coastal Commission receipt of this notice. Applicants will be notified by the Coastal Commission as to the date the Coastal Commission's appeal period will conclude. Appeals must be made in writing to the Coastal Commission's district office at the following address: Califomia Coastal Commission, 7575 Metropolitan Drive, Suite 103, San Diego, Califomia 92108-4402, Telephone (619) 767-2370. The time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is govemed by Code of Civil Procedures, Section 1094.6, which has been made applicable in the City of Carlsbad by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 16. Any petition or other paper seeking judicial review must be filed in the appropriate court not later than ninety (90) days following the date on which this decision becomes final; however, if within ten (10) days after the decision becomes final a request for the record ofthe proceedings accompanied by the required deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost of preparation ofsuch a record, the time within which such petition may be filed in court is extended to not later than thirty (30) days following the date on which the record is either personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attomey of record, if he has one. A written request for the preparation ofthe record ofthe proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, City of Carlsbad, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, Califomia 92008. 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 @ Citv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department August 23, 2001 BILL PONDER CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION SAN DIEGO DISTRICT 7575 METROPOLITAN DRIVE, SUITE 103 SAN DIEGO, CA 92108-4402 Re: Notice of Final Action for Army & Navy Academy Dormitory (RP 99-14/CDP 99-49) Dear Bill: In response to the Notification of Deficient Notice received regarding the above referenced project I sending a revised Notice of Final Action with the appropriate boxes marked. The subject property is not within the appealable area of the coastal zone and is therefore, not appealable to the Coastal Commission. The original notice did not include this statement. Also, the approved amendment to the design guidelines for the Army & Navy Academy campus are minor and serve to work in conjunction with the previously approved design guidelines for the campus. They simply permit the Academy to provide some alternative variations in the architectural design of future buildings. The Housing & Redevelopment Commission found the amendment to the design guidelines to be consistent with both the existing campus architecture and the design guideiines for the Village Redevelopment Area. Having said that, I do not believe this constitutes the need for a Local Program Amendment. I believe a copy of the amendment to the design guidelines for the Army & Navy Academy campus was included in the previous documents sent to you. If you require further documents or information regarding this matter, please contact my office at 760-434-2813. LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst Enclosures 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 Citv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT The following project is located within the City of Carlsbad Coastal Zone. A coastal permit application for the project has been acted upon. Application #: RP 99-14 Case Name: Army & Navy Academy Dormitory Applicant: Army & Navy Academy Address: 2605 Carlsbad Blvd.. Carlsbad 92008 Phone: 760-729-2385 Filing Date: 9/29/99 Decision Date: 7/24/01 Agent (if different): tBP Architecture Address: 2300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach. CA 92663 Phone: 949-673-0300 ACTION: • • APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS DENIED (Copy of final resolution is sent to: Coastal Commission, any persons who specifically requested it, and the applicant). COASTAL COMMISSION APPEAL STATUS; NOT APPEALABLE TO THE COASTAL COMMISSION. I I APPEALABLE TO THE COASTAL COMMISSION pursuant to Coastal Act Section 30603. An aggrieved person may appeal this decision to the Coastal Commission within ten (10) working days following Coastal Commission receipt of this notice. Applicants will be notified by the Coastal Commission as to the date the Coastal Commission's appeal period will conclude. Appeals must be made in writing to the Coastal Commission's district office at the following address: Califomia Coastal Commission, 7575 Metropolitan Drive, Suite 103, San Diego, Califomia 92108-4402, Telephone (619) 767-2370. The time within which judicial review ofthis decision must be sought is govemed by Code of Civil Procedures, Section 1094.6, which has been made applicable in the City ofCarlsbad by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 16. Any petition or other paper seeking judicial review must be filed in the appropriate court not later than ninety (90) days following the date on which this decision becomes final; however, if within ten (10) days after the decision becomes final a request for the record of the proceedings accompanied by the required deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost of preparation of such a record, the time within which such petition may be filed in court is extended to not later than thirty (30) days following the date on which the record is either personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attomey of record, if he has one. A written request for the preparation ofthe record ofthe proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, City ofCarlsbad, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, Califomia 92008. 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 ^ Lori Rosenstein - Re: ANA Status 6-11 -0^ Page 1 From: Lori Rosenstein To: Pat Kelley Subject: Re: ANA Status 6-11 -02 Pat: The architect is meeting with me this morning to go over the revised window plans. I will review the revisions with Debbie and then you and I may need to meet later this afternoon to discuss a strategy for them to resume work enough to remove the nonconforming windows and take the building back to a stage where an inspection can occur and the new windows can be installed. Lori »> Pat Kelley 06/11/02 09:44AM »> As of this morning, work has stopped on the dorm building. They are doing some site work related to the electrical feed and the fire line to that building. The supt asked me this morning at the site about "...are the bathroom windows a problem..." I replied that anything not per the approved plans should be processed as a revision. That must mean those windows are different as well. A resident, Mr. Sullivan, stopped me in the street to inquire about the job status. He commented on the window sizes and how much the neighborhood wants small, obscure glass windows mounted weii above the floor level. Evidently the students cause some neighborhood visual and auditory disturbances thru these larger, lower windows. I replied that they could have built an Institutional occupancy to restrain the liberties of the occupants, but that is not what was processed. I advised him the windows will be much larger and will be mounted much lower than they are - roughly the same as the windows on the dorm built a few years ago on the south side of the academy grounds. Obscure glass presents no UBC related issue In either bathrooms or bedrooms. Lastly, the supt mentioned the academy approaching the City about some type of limited resumption of work. And the architect, Dan Nolan has left me a message about us allowing them some type of "non-compliance" resume work" allowance. I am not inclined to do this to this point. But I suggested to the supt they propose something in writing to have the Stop Work order modified. PatK CC: Debbie Fountain; Mike Peterson; Pete Dreibeibis Lori Rosenstein-ANA REport Pagel From: Pat Kelley To: Debbie Fountain; Lori Rosenstein Date: 6/17/02 2:16PM Subject: ANA REport Lori and I met with reps from all interested parties at the ANA dorm this morning. In attendance were General Bliss, Roger Cellini (ANA), Willis Fisher (tBP Architects), 2 people from the general contractor (Bill Buchanon and Dana Teagarden), and Stuart from Hoffman Planning. The upshot of that meeting is that they have to process an as-built and change out dozens of windows. This will delay their projects a few weeks at least and may affect occupancy if they were planning on a September opening of this dorm concurrent with the upcoming school year. The changes they made have been significant and were made w/o Redev's knowledge. The inspector evidently had some knowledge of the changes based on tBP giving him some Requests for Information (RFI's) many months ago. There are no official records of tBP applying for plan check revisions however. The inspector (no longer employed by the City) was operating on his own and w/o authorization. In that regard, the ANA and tBP have little to say about these wholesale, unauthorized changes. Some of the things they did cannot be realistically reverted back to the originai pian. The windows and doors on the balcony side have deep headers and shouid have been integrally framed into the floor system. Then the transom windows above the doors and taller sidelights would have fit. To tear out the headers now, fiush frame them, and rebuilt the balcony floor joists would seriously compromise the framing. The bedroom windows on the south side are narrower and this may not materially affect the appearance of the overaii building. The North side of the building Is a different story and should be able to be made to look very, very close to the approved plans. That Is the side of the building most visible to the general public. By the way, they had planned to delete the tile wainscot w/o consent as weii. tBP agreed to get the revised architecturals to Lori ASAP and she and I will review this w/ Debbie, depending upon which windows they show, they could be back under construction within a week. We did tell them they could initiate raising the north side headers to accommodate new windows. Tedious but not difficult work. It's good this happened when it did. They'd have been way off the mark at finai inspection, and had students lined up ready to move in. I have expressed concern to those in attendance today they may have done or are planning to make other changes w/o staff's prior knowledge. We'll definitely watch this one closely as it gets closer. I have a feeling we are just seeing some of what they did. PatK CC: Joe Garuba; Mike Peterson; Pat Kelley; Pete Dreibeibis; Sandra Hoider Lori Rosenstein - Army Navy Academy Cojastruction ^ Page 1 From: Pat Kelley To: buconstr@pacbell.net; dtgarden@yahoo.com Date: 6/18/02 11:46AM Subject: Army Navy Academy Construction Bill and Dana - this email is to confirm in writing the allowance for some construction to resume at the above project. That allowance is limited to that work which is required to get the window systems and exterior lathing back into compliance with the approved plans and the approved architecturals. Site work may continue if in compliance with the approved plans. I haven't heard from tBP or Lori as yet, so there hasn't been any further discussion or decisions about specific window changes or exterior finish changes. It's a safe assumption that the lower level windows will be raised on the north elevation. Pat Kelley Principal Bldg Inspector CC: Debbie Fountain; Lori Rosenstein r Citv of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department December 6, 2001 ROGER CELLINI, DIRECTOR OF FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY PO BOX 3000 CARLSBAD.CA 92018 SUBJECT: RP 99-14/CDP 99-49 - Army and Navy Academy Dormitory. Dear Roger: This letter is written to clarify the condition added to this project by the Housing & Redevelopment Commission at the recommendation of the Design Review Board relating to the construction of the dormitory building and completion of the parking lot on Mountain View Drive. This condition states: "To mitigate impacts to the surrounding area from construction activity, construction of the parking lot at the northwest corner of Mountain View Drive and Carlsbad Blvd. shall be completed first, except for final surfacing, then used as a staging area for construction of the dormitory building." This condition requires that the parking lot at Mountain View Drive must be completed, except for final surfacing, prior to building construction activity on the dormitory site. This condition would allow you to grade the dormitory site before completion of the parking lot. The intent of this condition is to ensure that the parking lot serves as a staging area for construction vehicles and building materials related to the construction of the dormitory. It is not its intent to apply to grading activity on the dormitory site. I hope this provides you with clarification. Please don't hesitate to call me if you have any further questions. Sincerely, CITY OF CARLSBAD V LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst c : Mike Shirey, Project Engineer 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 ^ Lori Rosenstein - Re: Heads Up Pagel From: Pat Kelley To: Debbie Fountain; Sandra Holder Date: 6/7/02 7:36AM Subject: Re: Heads Up Before the windows were actually Installed, Paul York (their inspector), saw that the rough openings were going to be wrong (too high off the floor and too small) The sleeping rooms must have egress windows less than 44 inches above the finished floor and certain sizes to allow emergency egress and ingress for rescues. When the ANA was in discretionary review, they wanted to put in small windows in the dorm rooms to keep the students from climbing out at night. They were advised then that they have to have the egress windows in sleeping rooms and they cannot cure the behavioral Issue with eliminating this minimum code requirement. 1 guess they chose to do what they wanted anyway and see if it got caught. It did, and it will probably cause them a delay as the lead time for new windows could be substantial (4-6 weeks typically). Good call by the field inspector. PatK »> Debbie Fountain 06/06/02 12:50PM »> Hello. Just wanted to give you a heads up on an issue which may get raised to one or more of you related to the Army Navy Academy. The Army Navy Academy is currently under construction on their dormitory. They were stopped during building Inspection because they had installed smaller windows on the exterior of the building than were approved by the DRB and Housing and Redevelopment Commission, and subsequently on their building permit plans. They were told that they could not proceed until our Department reviewed the change. Apparently, Army Navy Academy just made the decision to install different windows due to concerns expressed by the residents in the area. They did not ask If it was OK. They just did It. We asked them to submit a set of plans for us to compare against the original approval. We have found that this is a substantial change which changes the design/look of the building. Because the design of the building was an Important issue with both the DRB and the Housing and Redevelopment Commission, our office has told Army Navy Academy that they have two choices 1) remove the windows they installed and install those that were approved by the Commission in the plans that they submitted for approval, or 2) stop all construction and request an amendment to their redevelopment permit to allow for the design change. The new windows are much smaller and create more solid white wall area. Staff does not believe that the new windows Improve the iook of the building. They actually create a building which looks more institutional. This is in direct conflict with what was expressed by the DRB and Commission. Because their construction Is now stopped until this issue Is resolved, I am sure that either one of you or the Council will hear about it. Consequently, let me know if you need any additional information on the matter. Just as a side note. Army Navy Academy has been doing this a lot in the past few years. They just do things on their property and then they come ask for permission after the fact (usually once they are caught). In the past, we have been cooperative and flexible to the degree we believe we have that ability. However, in this case, we do not believe that we should allow them to do what they did. CC: Lori Rosenstein; Pete Dreibeibis Lori Rosenstein - Re: Heads Up Page 1 From: Pat Kelley To: Debbie Fountain; Sandra Holder Date: 6/7/02 7:36AM Subject: Re: Heads Up Before the windows were actually Installed, Paul York (their inspector), saw that the rough openings were going to be wrong (too high off the floor and too small) The sleeping rooms must have egress windows less than 44 inches above the finished floor and certain sizes to allow emergency egress and ingress for rescues. When the ANA was in discretionary review, they wanted to put in small windows in the dorm rooms to keep the students from climbing out at night. They were advised then that they have to have the egress windows in sleeping rooms and they cannot cure the behavioral issue with eliminating this minimum code requirement. I guess they chose to do what they wanted anyway and see if it got caught. It did, and it will probably cause them a delay as the lead time for new windows could be substantial (4-6 weeks typically). Good call by the field Inspector. PatK »> Debbie Fountain 06/06/02 12:50PM »> Hello. Just wanted to give you a heads up on an issue which may get raised to one or more of you related to the Army Navy Academy. The Army Navy Academy is currently under construction on their dormitory. They were stopped during building inspection because they had installed smaller windows on the exterior of the building than were approved by the DRB and Housing and Redevelopment Commission, and subsequently on their building permit plans. They were told that they could not proceed until our Department reviewed the change. Apparently, Army Navy Academy just made the decision to Install different windows due to concerns expressed by the residents in the area. They did not ask if It was OK. They just did it. We asked them to submit a set of plans for us to compare against the original approval. We have found that this is a substantial change which changes the design/look of the building. Because the design of the building was an important issue with both the DRB and the Housing and Redevelopment Commission, our office has told Army Navy Academy that they have two choices 1) remove the windows they installed and install those that were approved by the Commission in the plans that they submitted for approvai, or 2) stop all construction and request an amendment to their redevelopment permit to allow for the design change. The new windows are much smaller and create more solid white wall area. Staff does not believe that the new windows improve the look of the building. They actually create a building which looks more institutional. This is in direct conflict with what was expressed by the DRB and Commission. Because their construction is now stopped until this issue is resolved, I am sure that either one of you or the Council will hear about it. Consequently, let me know if you need any additional information on the matter. Just as a side note, Army Navy Academy has been doing this a lot in the past few years. They just do things on their property and then they come ask for permission after the fact (usually once they are caught). In the past, we have been cooperative and flexible to the degree we believe we have that abiiity. However, in this case, we do not believe that we should allow them to do what they did. CC: Lori Rosenstein; Pete Dreibeibis Lori Rosenstein - ANA Update ^ Pagel From: Pat Kelley To: Debbie Fountain; Lori Rosenstein; Mike Peterson; Sandra Holder Date: 6/7/0212:28PM Subject: ANA Update Lori and I paid a visit to the site this morning. The windows as installed do not meet egress requirements from sleeping rooms. It is unclear on the job record card whether they had received approval to begin drywall, but they had begun to install drywall. I have directed Paul York to issue a stop work order for installation of all finish materials. They may continue to wrap the building to protect it from the weather. No stucco should be applied however. Lori and I spoke with the superintendent who indicated they had received a change order from the architect to change the window sizes back in November (they did not get their building permit until January). They knew well In advance they had no authorization to make such a change and there is about a 10 week lead time on these windows according to the supt. It would be inappropriate to allow the project to proceed without. It'll have to sit there while they figure out how to get materials to comply with the approved plans and then make the structural changes. I spoke w/ owner's rep (Roger) this afternoon and advised him to stop work on the building until they either complete the installation of the approved windows and framing systems, or process revisions thru the building dept and perhaps thru the discretionary review process If they are making substantial revisions to the exterior. I did tell him they could work on the site work (fire line in particular), but not the building itself. I said no to continued progress on everything but the windows. There are about 50 of them that have to be changed out unfortunately. They have their occupancy schedule pretty much goofed up needless to say, and there will be a lot of finger pointing on their side about who shoulda, woulda, coulda foreseen this. Occupying a dorm that does not egress properly does not have a work-around however. It's a big bust on their architect's part. As far as I can tell, the inspector who had been assigned to the project was not performing his job in holding them to the approved plans. He no longer works for the City, and the current inspector Paul York is picking up the remainder of the project and doing a good job of looking at things as he should. PatK CC: Bob Ledesma; Colleen Balch; Joe Garuba Lori Rosenstein - Re: ANA Windows ^ Page 1 From: Lori Rosenstein To: Pat Kelley Date: 6/10/02 2:10PM Subject: Re: ANA Windows Pat: I just talked to Tony Depaola of TBP Architecture. He going to come up with a plan to match the approved building elevations and send us a copy of the revised plans. My only concern is that he said he isn't planning on changing the size of the header on the building. The approved header was about 6", but the header that was constructed is 12"-14" according to Mr. DePaola. He said he is planning on putting the windows in front of the header and painting the area behind it black so the window sizes look like the ones that were approved. I am skeptical about the finished look of this proposal. But I can't make that judgement call until I see the proposal first hand. I will need your input as well for Building Code compliance. Mr. DePaola also said the windows may take only 5-6 weeks to order. I will let you know when I receive something from them. In the time being, you might want to have Paul York or code enforcement drive by the site each day to make sure no one is working on the building. I don't know why, but I don't trust them. Lori »> Pat Kelley 06/10/02 01:22PM »> your welcome let us not have our communication systems breakdown as badly as theirs evidently has.... »> Lori Rosenstein 06/10/02 01:21 PM »> Thanks for the info. »> Pat Kelley 06/10/02 01:16PM »> I returned a call to architect Dan Nolan (TVP Architects) who asked about an exception in the UBC which allows windows to open only 4" in hotel occupancies which are sprinklered etc. I advised him they are not building a hotel, but are building a congregate residence (dorm) and that exception does not apply. He indicated they will be changing out the windows per the original approved plans. We'll see... Pat CC: Debbie Fountain Lori Rosenstein - ANA Dormitory Page 1 From: Lori Rosenstein To: Debbie Fountain Date: 6/7/02 2:33PM Subject: ANA Dormitory Debbie: I know you have taken a look at Pat's e-mail by now. His e-mail laid out the facts. In short, they lied to us. They have had every intention of disregarding the approved plans since November (two months before the building permit was issued). While on-site, Pat and I saw a "bulletin" issued by TBP Architecture at the "request of the owner" to change out the windows. The "bulletin" was attached to the building plans the contractor was using on-site. Rolled up in the corner were the "approved" plans. More Importantly than the aesthetic issue is the life safety issue. In the event of a fire the occupants of the dormitory would have no escape route except for the front door. No one (not even you!) could fit through the window opening; that's how small it is. This probably made me more angry than anything. I contacted Roger Cellini of ANA when we returned from the field inspection and I made it quite clear to him that I was extremely angry about being lied to. Actually, I didn't put it quite as gentle as that. Pat and I have made it quite clear to them what them need to do. Short of processing their amendment, should they choose to submit one, I won't be spending any more time meeting with them. What a dayl Lori CITY OF CARLSBAD ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT LAND USE REVIEW September 13,2002 TO: Lori Rosenstein - Management Analyst FROM: David Rick - Assistant Engineer COMPLETENESS REVIEW PROJECT ID: RP 02-40/CDP 02-39 - COAL Outdoor Art Mart The Engineering Department has completed its 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 continued review. Engineering staff does not have any comments or conditions to add to the project. If you or the applicant has any questions regarding the above, please either see or call me at extension 2781. David Rick Assistant Engineer - Engineering Development Services H:\LIBRARY\ENG\WPDATA\MISC\COMPREV Lori Rosenstein - Re: ANA Call ^ ^ Pagel From: Jeremy Riddle To: Pat Kelley Date: 9/16/02 3:49PM Subject: Re: ANA Call Pat: After reviewing a 1999 preliminary title report on the Army-Navy properties, Permits Plus, and DMS I have found that the Architects findings to be true. Although the Assessors Map for APN 201-041-02 depict one APN, the legal description is comprised of many, many lots per the title report. We must keep in mind that anyone who owns contiguous existing lots may approach the County Assessors and ask for only one tax bill. By doing this leads to having one APN# on the Assessors Maps. This does not automatically consolodate the lots, though. The City response to the Architects statement would be the property title is clouded by this fact, and could be addressed by processing a lot line adjustment (say from 50 lots to 1) and recorded with a certificate of compliance for lot line adjustment purposes to memorialize the iot consolidation. Now that he has brought this to the City's attention we will ask for it to be cleaned up the next chance we have. FOOD FOR THOUGHT: A property owner with only one lot may also approach the County Assessors and ask for 4 separate tax bills for whatever reason. The Assessors Maps would then be revised to show 4 APN's, giving the appearance (to a city official) that the owner has 4 legal lots. In general City Officials shouid NOT use the APN maps as a basis for dermining the legal lot status, but rather through a title report, deed review, chain of title review, or final map review. Let me know if there are any further questions. Thanks. Jeremy Jeremy L. Riddle Associate Engineer City of Carisbad Public Works-Engineering jridd@ci.carisbad.ca.us »> Lori Rosenstein 09/16/02 02:54PM »> Pat: I checked the conditions of approval for the Dormitory as well as the Master Site Plan approved in 1995. Neither set of documents contain a condition for lot consolidation. However, if I am not mistaken, when we were reviewing the dormitory project, Mike Shirey told me the lot consolidation took place years ago. Jeremy will be able to confirm this through his research. Lori »> Pat Kelley 09/16/02 07:16AM »> I received a phone message from Architect John Mattox left Saturday with an interesting bit of information about the Army Navy Academy. He indicated he was made aware of a survey that showed that the ANA property is a collection of legal parcels (the small kind established years ago) and many of the existing and newer buildings have been constructed over those existing property lines - including the dorm under construction now. John's inquiry revolved around "How do we deal with the Building Code approach to building across legal lot lines?" My concern is whether we know this to be factual and whether their Master Plan documents show these lot lines. I was not aware that they had this situation there and probably would have required them to do a lot consolidation map as a condition of issuing a building permit across a legal lot. Do we know this to be factual? . OCT-22-2002 13:45 NOGLE ONUFER P.01 If you have any questions or problems regarding fax transmission please call 619-297^8066. FAX TRANSMITTAL PACE TOF^ a • d aan aan DATE : PROIECT NAME PROjECT NO. : TO FOR YOUR WE TRANSMIT THEFOLLOWINC: REMARKS BY CC NOGLE ONUFER ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS 2398 San Diego Ave. 5,111 Diego, CA 92110 Telephone; (619) 297.8066 Fa:<: !619) 297.8055 'ZD^7 CP) a use DCopies Date Description 0; N^PTK ei&)f^vof^ 0) P^I^TiaL mm eiEl/^n^Aj City of Carlsbad FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL DATE: TIME SENT: No. of pages transmitted (including fax transmittaLpage): m TO: (VO-SLV COMPANY: 0(\oW (DepL) PHONE #: (g\^-lAl-^(^b FAK #: FROM: ^^mVm DEPT: HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT PHONE #: (760) 434- ZWJ, FAX#: (760)720-2037 E-MAIL #: ^ci.carlsbad.ca.us This written message is for the exclusive use of the addressee and may contain confidential, privileged, and non-disclosable information. If the recipient of this message is not the addressee, or a person responsible for delivering the message to the addressee, then the recipient is prohibited from reading or using this message in any way. If you have received this message by mistake, please call us inmiediately and destroy the telecopy message. Housing & Redevelopment Department • 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B • Carlsbad, Califomia 92008 GCI-22-2002 13:45 NOGLE ONUFER P.02 If ?S^r- • 001-22-2002 13:46 , NOGLE ONUFER P.03 1 T TGTPlL P.03 Mar 03 03 11:14a p. 1 Army and Navy Academy P.O. Box 3000 Carisbad. CA 92018-3000 March 3, 2003 teve Bliss 729-2385 Ext. 257 720-7121 Lori Rosenstein Housing & Redevp.Dept. (760) (760) To: Phone: Fax Phone: (760) 720-2037 The attached Restraining Order is forwarded to you for your information and necessary action. If any problems occur during this transmission, please contact sender. 5 Pages including cover Mar 03 03 11:14a 02/28/03 16:05 p.2 Michael ^. Winsten. Esq., Bar No. 126554 WINSTE14LAWGR0UP 28202 Ca sot Road, Suite 625 Laguna Miguel, Califoraia 92677 ~ " : (949)347-4740 : (949) 347-7701 niike@winsten.coni 3 jTeleph' jTeIecopie|r: 4 IE-mail 5 I Attomeys FRIENDS 6 "STEPHEK Ajmy) 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Cl«rJ,ollh«aop»,lo, Court FEB 2 8 2003 BY: A. LUM for Plaintiffs OF THE ARMY AND NAVY ACADENfY; and BRIGADIER GENERAL M. BUSS, (Retired, United States SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, NORTH COUNTY DTVISION FRIEND$ OF THE ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY, a Califomia Non-Prafit Fubiic Benefit qorporalion; and BRIGADIER GENERiJi STEPHEN M. BLISS, (Retired, United Siates Army), an individual, in hia capacity ps Preaideat of the ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY, Carlsbad, California, a Non-Profit Public Benefit Corporation, Plaintiff, ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY, Carlsbad, Califom a, aNon-Profil Public Benefit Corporation; JOHNNIE R- CREAN. an individua; FRED L. ROWBOTHAM. an individu il; KARL F. HIESSER, an individual; BRUCE T. BEESLEY, an Individual; ALAN 0'KAI^, an individual; CHRISTOPHER TRAVlil. an individual; and BILL LOCKYER, as ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STAT^ OF CALIFORNIA, and DOES I through 100, inclusive. Defendants. CaseNo. GIN 027910 Assigned for all puiposes to the Hon. Thomas P. Nugent Dept. 30 Temporary Restraming Order and Order to Show Cause Why a PrelimiDary IjiJnncHoK and/or Receivership Should Not Be Granted Date: Febmary 28,2003 Tirae: 10:30 ajn. Dept.: 30 phonic OSC Hearing Date: )ate: March 20,2003 Tiine;3;00p.m. Dept: 30 Telephone No.: 760/806-6050 Complaint Filed: February 26,2003 Temp. RatrmmiftS <^<)^ &. OSC Re: Prelim. I]iina.« Etc Mar 03 03 11:14a p.3 02/28/0^'^ 16:0S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 C n reading the complaint on file in the above-entitled action and the declarations and exhibits thereto, the request for judicial notice, the mcmorandura of points and authorities submitted therewith, it appears lo the satisfaction ofthe court that this is a proper case for granting an order to show cause for a prelimmary injunction. Order to Show Cause Re Preliminary Injunction and/or Receivership Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that defendants JOHNNIE R. CREAN, an individual; FRED L ROWBOTHAM. an individual; FCARL F. HIESSER, an individual; BRUCE T. BEESLEY. an individual; ALAN O'KAIN, an individual; CHRISTOPHER TRAVIS, and each of them, sh 3w cause, if any they have, why the appointment ofthe receiver should not bc confirmed over the ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY, Carlsbad. Califonua, a Non-Profit Public Benefit Corporation, and why the defendants, and their agents, servants, employees, and represen atives, and all persons acting in concert or participating with them, should not be enjoined and restrained during the pendency ofthis action from engaging in, conunitting, or perform! nig, directly or indirectly, any and all ofthe following acts: a. Exercising any and all powers as Directors, Officers and/or agents ofthe ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY, Cadsbad, Califomia, a Non-Profit Public Benefit CorporaJion, including but not limited to the termination or discipline ofany officers, managers, employees, faculty, staff, and students; b. Interfering with the safety, security and status quo of the ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY, Carlsbad, California, a Non-Pro fit Public Benefrt Corporation, including the employment, power, autiiority and Office of the President of the ARMY AND NAVY ACADEIrlY, Carlsbad, Califbmia, a Non-Profit Public Benefit Corporation, by and through BRIGADIER GENERAL STEPHEN M. BLISS, (Retired, United States Amy), an individual, in his capaciiy as President ofthe ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY, Carlsbad, CaUfomia, a Non- Profit Pu slic Benefit Corporation, as well as all other current administrative, management, faulty, einployees and students ofthe ofthe ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY, Carlsbad. Califomia, a Non-Profit Public Benefit Corporation; -I-Tenp. Restrsinfaig Ordm A OSC Re; Prrflw. iBjon., E(t Mar 03 03 11:15a 02/28/03 15:05 p.4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 c. Contacting, threatening, harassing, intimidating, assaulting, telephoning, sending any messages to, follow, stalk, destroy the personal property of, disturb the peace of, and/oi' keeping under surveillance, any person affiliated in any way with plaintiffs FRIEND: 5 OF THE ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY, a Califomia Kon-Profit Public Benefit C orporation; and BRIGADIER GENTERAL STEPHEN M. BLISS, (Retired. United States Army), includmg the students, management, administration, faculty, staff, and outside s(5rvice providers and vendors, and all ofthe foregoing persons' families and householj members, as well as Susan Thompson, thc sister of defendant Johnnie R, Crean, and her fimily and household members. Tpmpofary Restraining Order n IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pending the hearing and determination of the order to jhow cause, the above-named defendants, and each of them, and their officers, agents, enployees, representatives, and all persons acting in concert or participating with them, art temporarily restrained and enjoined from engaging in or performing, directly or indireclh, any and all of the following acts: a. Disturbing or in any way interfering with the status quo now existing within the management and operation ofthe ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY, Carlsbad, CaU fom a, including the employment, power, authority and Office ofthe President ofthe ARMY i'lND NAVY ACADEMY, Carlsbad, Califoraia, a Non-Profit Public Benefit CorporaUon. by and through BRIGADIER GENERAL STEPHEN M. BLISS, (Retired, United States Army), an individujil. in his capacity as President of the ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY, Carlsbad, California, a Non-Profit Public Benefit Corporation, as well as all other current administrative, managei nent, faculty, employees and studerkts ofthe ofthe ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY, Carlsbad, California, a Non-Profit Public Benefit Corporation; This temporary restraining order shall expire upon a ruling denying and discharging the Ord^ to Show Cause, or any coatinued hearing thereon, or upon thc service ofany orders granting the Order to Show Cause upon the Defendants, whichever is later. -2- Tcrap. RestnlnlngOnkrs A OSC Rc: Pretim. Inlun.. ^ Mar 03 03 11:16a 02/28/33 16: 05 a. theretol, show plaintilfs forcgoi 71orderi 8 9 10 11 Jand rep 12 on or b ifore 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 26 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 IT DATED: Presenti!j4 WINST By:_ Attomprs ARMY" BRIGA13IER p.5 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that: Copies ofthe operative summons and complaint, declarations and exhibits request for judicial notice, memorandum of points and authorities, this order to cjause and temporary restraining order, and any supplemental papers filed by thc in connection with the March 20,2003,3:00 p.m. telephonic hearing on the '^g Order to Show Cause, be personally served on the defendants against whom this made not later than March 6.2003. in accordance with thc Code of Civil Procedure, A proof of service for the foregoing documents must bc filed with the court March 13, 2003; Thc parties' opposition to be filed and personally served by March 13,2003, y papers, if any, shall bc fded and personally served by March 18,2003. IS SO ORDERED. ''^6 2 8 20Q3 THOMAS P. NUGENT - Judge Qt lhe Supenor Court By: iN LAW GROUP ISUCHAEL S. WINSTEN I'S for Plaintiffs FRIENDS OF THE ^ NAVY ACADEMY; and GENERAL STEPHEN M. BLISS, (Retired, United States Army) & OSC Rer PnHrm. Injun., Ete. City of Carlsbad Housing & Redevelopment Department January 13, 2004 BILL HOFMAN HOFMAN PLANNING ASSOCIATES 5900 PASTEUR CT CARLSBAD, CA 92018 SUBJECT: Army & Navy Academy Street Improvements Dear Bill: Prior to the holidays we spoke about the street improvements along the south side of Pacific Avenue adjacent to the new dormitory on the Army & Navy Academy site. We discussed how the 12-foot wide dirt strip between the curb and the asphalt looks incomplete next to the substantial improvements recently completed by the Academy. We also discussed how the existing conditions make it unclear as to where private property ends and public right-of-way begins for parking purposes. When we last spoke I stated I would discuss the situation with our Public Works Department to determine a proper course of action. I recently heard back from our Public Works staff and a couple of alternatives to remedy the current situation were suggested. Before I get into the alternatives, I want to provide some history on how we got to where we are now. First of all let me clarify that this situation was the unfortunate result of bad timing. The Army & Navy Academy Dormitory was scheduled for a public hearing with one of the project conditions being the installation of full public improvements (i.e. curb, gutter, and sidewalks) along the project frontage on Pacific Avenue and Mountain View Drive. Prior to the hearing new regulations were passed in Carlsbad identifying both Pacific Avenue and Mountain View Drive as "Alternative Design Streets". The newly adopted regulations precluded the Council from including the standard street improvement requirements in the project approval. Any public improvements would have to go through a separate approval process including an engineering study of alternative street designs for the entire block and a series of public workshops to gather a majority of neighborhood support. As a result of the Alternative Design Street designation the Army & Navy Academy Dormitory was conditioned to provide only private landscape improvements and a curb along Pacific Avenue. All public right-of- way was to remain "as-is" until such time as the Academy completed the Alternative Street Design process. Unfortunately, at the time no one thought to include the completion of the asphalt between the curb and the edge of the existing asphalt. As a result, what we have today is a 12-foot wide gap between the two. Public Works has stated, as the property owner, the Academy has two alternatives. The first alternative is to participate in the budget process and request the street improvements be included in the annual review of potential Capital Improvement Projects. Of course this project will join dozens of others in a competition for limited funding. Typically, projects of highest significance are chosen over those that may rate 2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 ^ Bill Hofman 01/13/2004 Page 2 of less importance on a citywide basis. It is my opinion that a project of this nature is not likely to do well against projects of greater citywide significance. The second alternative is to go through some sort of alternative street design process. The formal Alternative Street Design process requires engineered plans for both sides of the street along the entire block. However, staff believes a sound argument can be made that improvements are needed along the Academy's frontage due to the nature of the use and the engineering issues on the south side of the street are considerably different than those on the north side and easier to resolve. At a minimum, this will require improvement plans be prepared to Carlsbad Engineering Standards and submitted through the Engineering Department. A neighborhood meeting will most likely be required to show support for Xhe project. The project itself may not require a public hearing, but this is something staff will have to decide once the plans are submitted. At this point in time the process itself is a little vague, but staff is willing to work with the Academy to come up with a solution that hopefully works for everyone involved and still meets the spirit and intent of the Alternative Street Design process. If the Army & Navy Academy chooses to pursue approval of the street improvements along Pacific Avenue I suggest you start by requesting a meeting with Deputy City Engineer Bob Wojcik to work out the details of the process. I will be happy to participate in any meetings and help in any way I can. If you have any questions regarding the information contained in this letter, please contact my office at 760-434-2813. Sincerely, CITYXi£XARLSBAD LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst C: Debbie Fountain Skip Hammann Bob Wojcik MAY 21, 2001 TO: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD FROM: Management Analyst, Redevelopment Department Design Review Board Agenda Item 1 - Army & Navy Academy Dormitory The attached letters have been submitted in response to the Army & Navy Academy Dormitory (RP99-14/CDP99-49) on tonighfs Design Review Board Agenda. They are being submitted for your review and for inclusion into the record of tonighfs proceedings. LORI H. ROSENSTEIN Management Analyst William J. Crawford '^ V- Past Council Chairman MD-4 A*^ ' •3 ^y^;<o . May 6, 2001 City of Carlsbad 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B Carlsbad, CA 92018 RE: Dormitory for Army and Navy Academy To Whom it May Concem: I am writing this letter to express my support of the Academy's plan to build a new dormitory to replace the one lost to fire. As a grandparent of a student at the Academy, and my role in Lions Clubs Intemationai overseeing 982 Lions Clubs in Califomia, and their activity in youth development, I know firsthand the positive effect the Academy has on the lives of boys transitioning into young adulthood. As a resident ofNorth County, I am proud to have an institution in our community that is well known for its high standards in developing character and academic ability. Its 95% acceptance rate of graduates into four-year universities and colleges is a worthy accomplishment. I am impressed by the Academy's long history as a member of the Carlsbad community since the 1930s. To help continue its legacy of providing quality education in a setting conducive to academic and personal growth, I urge the City to approve the Academy's plans for a new dorm. Sincerel 1731 Tattenham Rd • Encinitas, California 92024 • H:(760) 753-8793 F:(760) 753-4885 May 12, 2001 Lori Rosenstein Housing and Redevelopment Department 2965 Roosevelt Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Re: Rebuild of ANA dorm Dear Ms. Rosenstein; I am a proud Carlsbad resident. The boys of the Army Navy Academy have been part of our community for as long as I can remember. I want to encourage you to speed up the process In which they can rebuild their dorm. It Is the least of which the community can do for one of Its own. Thank You, Eric Hattpj 6620 Ambrosia Ln.#419 Carlsbad, CA 92009 May 15, 2001 Lori Rosenstein Housing and Redevelopment Department 2965 Roosevelt Carlsbad, CA 92008 Re: approval for ANA dorm CATALyST P 0 W E R An ABB Company Dear Mrs. Rosenstein; I am the parent of a cadet at the Amy Navy Academy and a new homeowner in Carlsbad. As such, I wish to encourage you to accelerate the process for approval of the dorm under consideration by your department. We relocated to the area with the expressed goal of achieving the best possible education for our son. Happily, the Academy gives us that. However, the boys are living in rooms that were built before most of us were bom. Although, there has been some constmction of newer dorms and some remodels over the years, there still exists a severe need for more up-to-date facilities, especially with the destmction of one. If the Army Navy Academy is to continue to be a source of city pride, I enlist your attention in this matter. 2131 Palomar Airport Rd Suite 300 Carlsbad, CA 92009 Phone: 1-760-431-5159 Fax: 1-760-431-5160 www.catalystpower.com Thank You, Susan Gardner 4934 Loma Laguna Dr. Carisbad, CA 92008 Cc: Col. Miller RECEIVED MAY 1 7 2001 May 14, 2001 City of Carlsbad Housing and Redevelopment Department 2965 Roosevelt Carlsbad, CA 92008 Re: dorm-Army Navy Academy Dear Ms. Rosenstein; It has been brought to my attention by a co-worker that there has been some opposition to the rebuilding of the fire-destroyed dorm at the Army Navy Academy. As an Olde Carlsbad resident, I consider the ANA a pleasant addition to our downtown area. I am concerned that, in the need for business development, we will become simply a high density tourist area. The expansive grounds breaks up the solid rows of houses with little or no set- backs. Please support the Academy's efforts by soliciting your department's quick approval. Thank you. >andi Star 376 Juniper Ave. #23 Carlsbad, CA 92008 BEOElVEr MAY 1 7 2001 -(OUSifiG & ?EDEV&!OKv;e«