The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1978-11-07; City Council; 5647; Haedrich Meat Market Revise Building Plans Phase II K I J,a CITY OF CARLSBAD 3� Initial: AGENDA BILL NO.,y(o yr% Dept. Hd DATE: November T, 1978 C. Atty. DEPARTMENT: Engineering C. Mgr. Subject: HAEDRICH MEAT MARKET - REQUEST TO REVISE BUILDING PLANS PHASE I ALLOCATION, NO. C003 Statement of the Matter Walter Kuetzing, architect for the Haedrich Meat Market to be located at 6118 Paseo del Norte, has requested Council allow substantial revisions to building plans which are subject to the Phase I allocation system. The Phase I allocation system was intended primarily to provide relic for hard- ship eases which were unexpectedly caught in the sewer moratorium. Successful applicants were expected to begin construction in a timely manner. It would appear as if the applicant was not prepared to exercise the sewer allocation in a timely manner. Exhibits I. Memo to City Manager dated October II, 1978 2. Letter from Mr. Kuetzing dated October 14, 1978 3. Vicinity map I. That Council deny the applicant's request; and 2. Require the applicant to resubmit the original plan with the required corrections within 30 days; and 3. Require the applicant to pursue the issuance of the building permit in a timely manner so as to secure such within 90 days. Council action: 11-7-78 Council made the findings that the plans are substantially the same and directed staff to process said plans according to the original application. MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: City Engineer ,DATE: October 11, 1978 SUBJECT: HAEDRICH MEAT MARKET - PHASE I SEWER ALLOCATION APPLICATION NO. C003 Under the first phase sewer allocation, the Council allo- cated sewer service to the Haedrich Meat Market to be located on Paseo del Norte near Palomar Airport Road. The building Permit plans and application were received on January 19, 1978, and the applicant was notified that the plans were ready for correction on April. 25, 1978. Corrected plans have not -been resubmitted. Instead, the applicant has retained a new archi- tect and has submitted new plans for a similar structure with a completely different configuration. The Phase I allocation system was intended for hardship cases. Those who were allocated sewer connections were expected to pursue the building permits and construction in a timely manner. In addition, building plans were required to be "as represented" on the sewer allocation application. Further, the applicant contacted the Engineering Department before changing the building plans and asked if a substantial change could be made. The applicant was told at that time if a substantial change was made, then a new sewer allocation would be required. For the reasons outlined above, it is my determination that sewer service is not available for the revised building plans. These plans should be returned to the applicant as submitted tc- gether with a letter notifying the applicant that substantial re-, visions to the original plan will void the sewer allocation. 10 Tim Flanagan City Engineer TCF:FNL:VEB I A K W A L T E R KU E T Z I N c r7r • A R- C H I T. E C T rn 1'440 GI R AR 0 Honorable Mayor and City Council ;" P.O. BOX 1 5 5 E City of Carlsbad, California t- `% LA J O L L A, C A. 9 2 0 37 1200 Elm Avenue P 11. 4 5 9 - 2 7 0 9 Carlsbad, Ca. 92008 Oct.14,1978 To the attention of Mr. Paul Bussey, City Manager Gentlemen: - This letter is directed to you at the request of Mr. John. Haedrich and Mr. George Nicholas, as applicant and owner of Parcels A & B, Map 4279; on Paseo del Norte, Carlsbad, and in regard to building permit application No. 78-34. The project is a Lieat processing slant and represents a two-year effort of Mr. Haedrich to locate in this area. On December 20, 1977, Mr.. Haedrich obtained a sewer allocation as prerequisite for a building permit, and building plans were submitted for plan check within the required time period. Mr. Haedrich believed he acted in strict compliance with the ordinance covering the permit situation, and had in good faith commissioned a contracting firm to file complete and workable plans. By the time the Building Department, on April 25, 1978, advised of corrections to be made prior to further processing of the permit application, the owners had realized that the,sub- mitted plans were neither complete, nor readily workable. Spe- cifically, the plans contained no plumbing and liquid waste disposal layout that would address the matter of sewer use; they created a problem of surface drainage from the interior of the parcel, and they furnished inadequate truck access and insuffi- cient parking that would not meet city requirements without an easement oven the adjacent Parcel B, not then a part of the site. The owners immediately engaged an architectural and plan- ning firm to study the problems and develop a remedial solution. Several proposals were prepared and required discussion with 1 K Haedri.ch Bui' in" Bldg :?ermit App1. ;" 34 ,. Page 2 the Building Department, the Planning Department, and the City Engineering Department. The partieular use of the building, the difficult site geometry, and the necessity to consult food Processing code and equipment specialists, required a number of conferences, so that a solution that seemed acceptable to all parties could not reach the drawing stage until early in August. In the meantime it had also been established that the original plans would not meet new energy -conservation standards recently manda od by State Law, and that different construction specifications would have to be developed before a building Permit could be issued. All these revisions made it advisable to submit the plans again to the San Diego Coast Regional -Com- mission, which on August 23, 1978 issued an amendment, valida- ting the proposed revision under the original Permit P - 5471. The proposed revisions, containing all corrections previous- ly requested•by the Building Department, were submitted to the City on October 10 in the hope that a building permit could be issued shortly and construction commence without further delay. The owners believe that they have a valid application, never having been advised to the contrary. Acting in good faith, 'they never visualized endangering their allocation, but invested con- siderable time and expense toward the best solution of the problem at hand. In view of these facts, the owners and applicants respect- fully request that the City Council grant 'a reasonable extension of the sewer allocation ,for this project, confirming the validity of the building permit application. They are, of course, agree- able to apply the corrections to the originally submitted plats, but hope for permission to utilize the improved plans based on identical site and sewer allocation, and nearly identical floor area. The owners would be glad to speak before the Council on any point requiring further clarification. Very truly yours, 4 a ;er ue Ling, r ec � C-602 Cc (Owners' Representative _1. SHT 2 PALOMAR AI R POR I RD R•S _ o.s, 7i Q a 34B 1 (tl I � SO•L.Yd �J \ u� 19.09 AC. �V 5 n N b S 9.5?•w<Dd N89�55•e • u R 1p 2905t PAR-1 a 4.3y4�. i2 PAR. A 21 zna> " �S N m 31.98 AC. . &A t� `V" N°1 O. Q C`� �• N if Q PA .2- $ 22 rA �,�r>o"a h; POR. LOT PAi a 3:or �t PAR-3 Nr 9 9° : O Ali E i 35.41 AC �", J• ti u •D o,2 G2 O 24 PAR • a' ?�' ��'�� '•- h N o d 0.97 AC.�'1 i Z J A R. c >w �`@)� a' �♦'9 �, w Q ♦ p 'a 5 1.07 AC. P%)PAR 2/v5 t•.s • • � • � � I7 •B �=o �'� e 3 AR.6 2Nzs .- t. �-ase.l� w . --�in OFSEC SO LI NE 1.70 AC. PAR 3 sass. a b� Hn•19' ? MINO DELPA 3937,to lass w 3 oR'h"' 4•s9 AC POR 2`4 � 3. ► ,5 3�3.1` _ [ 18 214 '9xe Fav'a°'E Nov°3a E `g159 ) 214 £ 24 rllvl,7 IzIA Y I `s SAN DIEGO COUNTY' ASSESSOR'S MAP SK 211 PQ 04 MAPPED FOR, ASSESSMENT PURPOSES: ONLY � r.r L �. 1