Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-06-07; City Council; 5090; Mulcahy ingress/egress easement quitclaimCITY OF CARLSBAD AGESDA BILL NO. DATE : June 7, 1977 - DEPARTMENT: Public Works C. Mgr. Sub j ect : REQUEST TO QUIT CLAIM INGRESS/EGRESS EASEMENT ROBERT MULCAHY, LOT 15, FALCON HILLS UNIT 4 * Statement of the Matter Mr. Robert Mulcahy is the owner of Lot 15, Map No. 5685, Falcon Hills Unit 4 recorded February 2, 1966. This property fronts on Blenkarne Drive (Residence No. 3035) and backs onto Elm Ave- nue in that segment currently under construction. In this sub- division, ingress/egress rights from Elm Avenue to those proper- ties fronting on interior streets were dedicated to the City. Mr. Mulcahy, unaware of his deed restrictions concerning ingress/ egress, had construcEed a gate in his rear fence to allow access to his rear property from Elm Avenue for the purpose of storing his recreational vehicle in his backyard rather than on the street. Mr. Mulcahy, now cognizant of the deed restriction, is requesting relief from the City. 'Exhibits 1. Letter 'from Robert Mulcahy received May 10, 1977 2. Staff report 3. Vicinity map Recommendation That City Council deny the request. Council action e 6-7-77 It was agreed that the matter be returned to staff for preparation of a permit to allow Mr. Mulcahy access to his rear property from Elm Avenue for purpose of storing his recreational vehicle. Rsbert David Mulcahy 3035 Blenkarne Drive Carlsbad, Ca. 92008 Telephone 729-8728 City Council City of Carlsbad, California 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, Ca. 92008 Gentlemen: RECEIVED MAY 1 0 1977 CITY OF CARLSBAD Englneerhg Department I request a vacation of ingress/regress rights over a length 12 feet on the northern side of my property facing Elm Avenue. In addition, I seek to have the retaining wa11,to be built along my property line, interupted for a length of 12 feet. I believe that of my -- requests are reasonable and will effect a cost-savings for the City. Following is my justification for my requests: I make my requests in order to have the capability to store my 24 foot motorhome in my backyard, and to obtain occasional (1-2 times a month) access to Elm Avenue to store/return the vehicle in my yard. I stress that the access will not be for everyday purposes such as one would normally use a driveway. Use will be extremely limited. My alternative to storing the vehicle in my backyard is to park it on Blenkarne Drive in front of my house: my front driveway is only 20 feet long, and the space on both sides of the house is insufficient to store the vehicle. I feel, and I'm sure my good neighbors agree with me, that parking this vehicle on the street is something we'd all like to avoid. I have constructed a bi-fold gate in my back fence, through which I can easily drive the motorhome and park it in my backyard. As can be seen in picture #1 attached, the vehicle is parked so as not to be a nuiaance to my neighbors. Their fence is only slighly lower than the roof of the vehicle. The motorhome is approximately 35 feet from the nearest structure. I have had to construct only a slight grade (about 1 foot overall) from the sidewalk level to the yard level. See picture #2. I do not require an entrance curb. As can be seen by picture #3, interuption of the retaining wall for a length of 12 feet will permit operation of the bi-fold doors, and allow ingress-regress to my property. The cost of 12 feet of re- tainer wall would be saved. In addition, the wall would serve no real purpose because there is no earth to be retained behind it. I plan to attend the May 17th meeting of the Council, and will be happy to answer any questions the Council may have regarding my requests. Aery truly yours, WTY DAVID MULCAHY Picture #1 Picture #2 Picture #3 MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: Public Works Administrator DATE : May 10, 1977 SUBJECT: Request to Quit Claim Ingress/Egress Easement Mr. Robert Mulcahy is the property owner of Lot 15, Map No. 5685, Falcon Hills Unit 4 recorded February 2, 1966. This is property fronting on Blenkarne Drive (Residence No. 3035) and backing onto Elm Avenue in that segment currently under construction. As a condition of recording the subdivision, ingress/egress rights from Elm Avenue to those properties fronting on interior streets were dedicated to the City. Some time within the last few months, Mr. Mulcahy constructed a gate in his rear fence which physically allows him to gain access to his rear property from the Elm Avenue right-of-way. The purpose of this is to provide the capability of storing his 24-foot recreational vehicle in his backyard rather than on the street in front of his house. Obviously, Mr. Mulcahy was not aware of his deed restriction concerning ingress/egress. During preliminary construction staking, this change, providing rear lot access, was discovered by City forces. construction drawings proposed to build a short (two feet, plus or minus) retaining wall along the property line at this point. now aware of his problem and is requesting relief from the City. It was of concern because the Mr. Mulcahy is Discussion It is now, and has been for some time, City policy to require ingress/ egress easement along the property lines adjoining arterial streets where those properties can be served from an interior residential street. The purpose of this is to eliminate interference with the function of arterial streets caused by access from adjacent private property and to create a safer less frequented means of property access than the highly traveled arterial system would otherwise provide. While the case at hand would not allow or provide for primary access but would be used only infrequently to allow for storage of the recreational vehicle and could be accomplished without the need to construct a drive- way depression but simply by eliminating a short section of retaining wall, it might be considered as precedent-setting in reversing normal City policy. The benefit to be gained should Council grant relief to Mr. Mulcahy would be that his recreational vehicle would be stored on- site rather than in public right-of-way in front of his house eliminat- ing otherwise available public parking and the attendant blocking of visi- bility that such vehicles cause. City Manager -2- May 10, 1977 Recommenda t i on For purposes of maintaining consistency of City policy, staff would recom- mend that Council deny the request. However, should Council wish to grant relief to Mr. Mulcahy, they should instruct staff to work out the neces- sary arrangements which allow Mr. Mulcahy to achieve his ends while pro- tecting the City's interest. Ronald A. Beckman, P.E. Public Works Administrator RAB:veb . .- @ MAP 4 MAP