HomeMy WebLinkAboutRP 94-04; Alvarez Flower Stand; Redevelopment Permits (RP) (3)December 8, 1994
TO: CITY ATTORNEY
FROM: DEBBIE FOUNTAIN, HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
LETTER FROM MR. RICHARD MACGURN
As you requested, attached are the letters I received from Mr. Richard Macgum, attomey,
dated November 28, 1994 and December 6, 1994.
When I received the letter dated November 28th on December 5, 1994, I contacted Mr.
Macgum to discuss it with him. I told him that I never contacted his client on or off the
flowerstand site. I indicated that any correspondence or discussions I have had regarding the
stand have either been with him (Mr. Macgum) or the property owners (S.I Financial
Group). Mr. Macgum indicated that his client told him that I visited the site and harrassed
them. When I stated that I had not been to the site, Mr. Macgum offered an apology and
said he would send a letter of apology to me. He said his communications are somewhat
strained between him and his client due to language barriers.
Although Mr. Macgum did send a letter following our telephone conversation, it did not
contain an apology in my opinion. It simply acknowledged that I had contacted him. I still
feel that he owes me a written apology, especially since he sent copies to other persons
beside me. In my opinion, I have always been very professional and helpful to Mr. Macgum
throughout his effort to assist Mr. Alvarez. The letter from Mr. Macgum was very upsetting.
Thank you for indicating that you would prepare a letter to forward to Mr. Macgum. Your
attention to this matter is very much appreciated.
Law Offices of ^hard^. Macgurn
15 CHESTNUT AVENUE. SUITE E3
^ ^ ^^^S. CARLSBAD, CA 92008
^ ^ (619) 729-7162
FAX (619) 729-2860 November 28, 1994
Debbie Fountain
Senior Management Analyst
City of Carlsbad
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B
Carlsbad CA 92008-2389
Re: 2815 Jefferson Street, Carlsbad, CA
APN: 203-110-29
Dear Ms. Fountain:
This is in response to your letter of October 26, 1994 and
your recent visit to my client's flower stand. I previously chose
to ignore the hostile and rude tone of your letter, however your
comments to my client during your visit to his stand necessitate a
reply.
When I was retained in this matter I arranged to meet with you
on April 25, 1994 to discuss the City's requirements. Although you
were cordial you seemed to have a very negative attitude towards
Mr. Alvarez's desire to conduct his business within the
Redevelopment District. I advised you that we fully intended to
comply with the city ordinances and looked forward to receiving the
cooperation of the City Planning Department and the Housing and
Redevelopment Department.
On June 8, 1994, we submitted our plans in considerable
detail. I personally delivered the application to the City
Planning Department with a cover letter and a business card. I
advised the Planning Department if there was additional information
they needed, to please contact me. Additionally, all of the maps
that we prepared had my name and address on them. Unfortunately,
the forms provided by the City do not provide a place for the name
of the applicant's representative. Mr. Holzmiller's response to
our application was dated July 6, 1994. However, since the
response was directed to my client (who does not read or speak
English), I was unaware of the request for additional information
until August 24, 1994. Since that time we have been diligent in
preparing the additional documentation requested. I currently have
a meeting scheduled with Elaine Blackburn for December 1, 1994 to
review what we have prepared to be certain that we comply with the
city's request.
Although Elaine Blackburn wrote to me on October 26, 1994,
which I received on November 2, 1994, you also wrote me on
October 26, 1994, which I received on November 3, 1994. The
difference between the two letters is that your letter is rude and
Debbie Fountain
November 28, 1994
Page Two
hostile. I am aware of what the time limits were within which to
submit the completed documentation. I am sure you will agree that
the documentation required is considerable.
Although prior to submitting the application I was assured
(and common sense would dictate) that an Environmental Impact
Assessment Fom - Part 1 was not necessary, now one is being
required. Although the nature of this project is certainly one
that should not require many of the things needed for the large
commercial projects, it seems that we are being treated as if we
were constructing an office building, instead of operating a flower
stand.
The complexity of the application process for a redevelopment
permit does not trouble me as much as your comments to my client.
I am advised that you indicated to him that I was rude, presumably
to you. You also indicated that you had a generally negative
opinion of lawyers. If the comments are properly attributable to
you, I suggest they are inaccurate, inappropriate and
unprofessional. I also suggest that your letter and visit was
designed to intimidate my client. Mr. Alvarez has a right to live
and work in this city like all the other citizens of Carlsbad. I
believe the City of Carlsbad has an excellent reputation for
treating its citizens fairly. I am very concerned about your
behavior and am copying this letter to Mr. Michael Holzmiller,
Mr. Martin Orenyak, and Mr. Ronald Ball so they will be aware of
the situation. If you continue to be rude and hostile or make
additional efforts to intimidate my client during the application
process, I will file a formal complaint against you.
If your have any questions or wish to discuss this matter
further, please contact me.
RBM:cec
cc: Silvino Alvarez
Martin Orenyak
Michael J. Holzmiller
Ronald R. Ball
#
Law Offices of'Ricfuird'B. Macgurn
1015 CHESTNUT AVENUE, SUITE E3
December 1 1994 CARLSBAD. CA 92008 uecemoer i, xyy^ (619) 729-7162
FAX (619) 729-2860 Elaine Blackburn
City of Carlsbad Planning Department
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576
Re: RP 94-04 Alvarez Flower Stand, Minor Redevelopment Permit
Dear Ms. Blackburn:
I appreciated the opportunity to meet with you and Mr. Quan on
November 29, 1994. Pursuant to the List of Items Needed to
Complete Application attached to the July 6, 1994 correspondence
from Michael Holzmiller and our meeting, I have made the following
changes to the plans submitted on behalf of Silvino Alvarez in
support of his application for a Minor Redevelopment Permit for his
flowerstand:
- The telephone numbers of the applicant, Mr. Alvarez, and the
property owners, George and Betty Kelso, have been added to
the General Information on Plan Sheet 2.
- My name, address and telephone number, as Mr. Alvarez's
representative, have been added to the General Information on
Plan Sheet 2.
- The Project Number (RP 94-04) has been added to the upper
right hand corner of Plan Sheet 1 and 2.
- Information regarding sizes/areas, written dimensions and
scaled distances have been added, clarified or verified on
Plans Sheets 1 and 2.
- The zoning indicated on the Summary Table has been changed
to V-R and the existing land use designation on the Table has
been changed to RMH/O.
- The Average Daily Traffic Generation figure has been changed
to 17, which was determined during our meeting to be a more
accurate figure, based on Mr. Alvarez's observations, than the
figure (approximately 6) arrived at by using the latest
version of the "Brief Guide to Vehicular Traffic Generation
Rates for the San Diego Region" published by SANDAG.
- An EIA, Part I has been prepared, but it is understood that
the necessity for an EIA, Part II, and associated costs, may
be waived after review. It has been confirmed that Mr.
Alvarez utilizes drip irrigation and applies no pesticides or
herbicides to his growing beds.
- The property lines of the site have been clearly indicated.
- The location of existing driveways on both this site and on
adjacent properties have been identified.
- The dimensions and location of the one proposed driveway has
been indicated, including the 3 foot skirts and 12 foot
minimum apron, and its proposed location has been shown,
exceeding the minimum 3 foot clear distance from property
lines.
- A typical cross section of Jefferson Street has been added
to Plan Sheet 2.
- The existing street improvements on Jefferson Street have
been identified on Plan Sheet 2.
- The dimensions of the parking stall have been shown and a
"U" driveway has been identified, showing the intended
circulation pattern, the drive's gravel surfacing and
clearance distances of the turnaround, from the flowerstand to
the growing beds.
- The fire hydrant located across the street at Jefferson's
intersection with Home Street has been indicated.
- All dimensions on the site plan have been checked and
matched with the indicated scale of 3/32" = 1'.
- The term "Constructed" has been replaced with either the
term "Existing" or "Proposed" as it relates to the walls,
fencing, driveways and vegetation.
- The headings for the Elevations on Plan Seet 2 have been
clarified and changed to read "West Elevation" and "North
Elevation".
Please contact me prior to December 8, 1994 if you have
further questions or require additional information. If there are
minor corrections or additions needed, perhaps they could be
handled as "issues" as you suggested.
I look forward to your advising me that our Application is
complete. Thank you for your continued courtesy and cooperation in
this matter.
Richard B. Ma
RBM: eg
cc: Silvino Alvarez
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNINQ DEPT.