Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-06-28; City Council; Info; Report on Citizen ConcernsL' D B13 AE3#�'i_� TITLE: MTC,. 6/28/88 REPORT ON CITIZEN CONCERNS DEPT.— CM RECOMMENDED ACTION: No Council action required - receive and file. DEPT. HD.� — CITY ATTY._ CITY MGR.- ITEM EXPLANATION: This item is being presented to the Council for information purposes only. It addresses the concerns expressed by Mr. Michael Lompart during the Public Comment period at the June 14 and June 21, 1988 Council meetings, FISCAL IMPACT: None EXHIBIT: 1 • Memorandum to City Manager dated June 22, 1988. z O L3 d Z n O 0 June 22, 1988 TO: CITY MANAGER FROM: Assistant City Manager PUBLIC COMMENTS BY MR. MICHAEL LOMPART AT JUNE 21, 1988 COUNCIL MEETING Mr. Mike Lompart of 2025 Chestnut Avenue, addressed the City Council at its June 14 and 21 Council meetings regarding street work and drainage problems in front of his home. At the Council's June 14 meeting, Mr. Lompart complained of repair work that was done in front of his home to correct some safety hazards. Upon the recommendation of the Risk Manager, the Utilities/Maintenance Department took action to correct a number of potential problems created by the installation of unauthorized structures in the street in front of Mr. Lompart's home. A memorandum from -the Risk Manager clarifying the reasons for this work is attached. Over the past few years, numerous staff members have been in contact with Mr. Lompart to deal with his concerns about problems in his neighborhood. The Utilities/Maintenance Director, Mr. Ralph Anderson, and I personally inspected the street area in front of Mr. Lompart's home and spoke with Mrs. Lompart regarding their concerns. Various members of Mr. Anderson's staff have been in contact with Mr. Lompart seeking ways to deal with his concerns. Mr. Lompart's primary concern at this time is with drainage in front of his home. Mr. Lompart's house is located on the south side of Chestnut Avenue, east of the intersection of Monroe. Standard curb, gutter and sidewalk is installed from the corner of Monroe easterly to the eastern edge of Mr. Lompart's property. East of Mr. Lompart's property, the road narrows, standard curb gutter and sidewalk are not installed, and an asphalt gutter extends easterly from Mr. Lompart's house up the hill on Chestnut. The drainage problem that Mr. Lompart is experiencing is primarily due to the lack of standard improvements to the east of his property. Water running from east to west along Chestnut street in the asphalt gutter sheets out when it reaches the widened portion of the road and tends to drop small particles of dirt and debris that are otherwise suspended in the water when it is moving more rapidly. As a result, a minor amount of dirt and debris is deposited in the street in front of Mr. Lompart's property. Mr. Lompart finds this deposition of material to be a nuisance in that it is tracked onto his property from the wheels of vehicles and is unsightly. City staff has explored various alternatives to correct this problem, however, the ultimate solution is to install standard curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements to the east of Mr. Lompart's property. This will occur as ghat property is redeveloped or if an improvement district is initiated. Until permanent improvements are installed, City staff will implement interim improvements in an attempt to handle the minor silting and debris problem. Utilities/Maintenance Department staff is currently evaluating interim measures and will be discussing those with Mr. Lompart. Until the interim improvements are installed, City crews will weekly inspect the street in front of Mr. Lompart's house and remove any unusual accumulations of dirt and debris. The City's street sweeping contractor will be alerted to ensure that this area receives sweeping during the normal two week sweeping cycle. June 22, 1988 CITY MANAGER/LOMPART Page 2 The unauthorized nonconforming improvements that were built in the street will not be replaced. The barricades and signs that have been installed by City crews will remain to provide adequate guidance to pedestrians and motorists for safe traffic circulation in this area. City staff will continue to work with Mr. Lompart to resolve this concern, however, staff may not be able to do everything that Mr. Lompar4 wants due to cost impacts and inconsistency with City standards. FRAN MANNEN saf c: Mayor Council Members City Attorney Utilities/Maintenance Director Risk Manager June 20, 1988 TO: Assistant City Manager FROM: Risk Manager Complaint of Michael Lompart At the City Council meeting held on June 14, 1988, Mr. Michael Lompart complained about some repair work that was done on City property in front of his residence. He indicated that he thought that the work cost at least $5,000. He also indicated that his property was being flooded and covered with debris accumulation as a result of that change. There have been numerous conversations with Mr. Lompart. His statements at the Council meeting were not an accurate reflection of the information that he had previously provided to us. First, with reference to the cost of the project, the total expense was approximately $380, not $5, 000. The Streets Department prepared an itemized list of those expenses. A copy is attached for your review. Second, Mr. Lompart's property is not subjected to flooding or debris accu- mulation. As he told me previously, water runs in the street next to the curb. When he drives his car through the water, moisture and debris will cling to his tires and then be deposited on his driveway. I explained to Mr. Lompart that that would happen wherever he drove. Third, the curbing that Mr. Lompart installed in the street, without City approval, created a safety hazard and a potential liability problem. It was approximately 63' in length and extended about 18' into the traffic lane. Fourth, Mr. Lompart was unhappy that the matter was not discussed with him prior to be undertaken. The Street Department informed me that when they attempted to correct the problem previously, Mr. Lompart initiated a confrontation and turned his hose on the crew. As a result of that incident, it was felt that a quick correction of the hazard would be more prudent than initiating a conversation with him. In any event, the hazard was on City property and created an additional exposure for the City, as well as Mr. Lompart. The correction of that problem was the City's responsibility. Fifty, in actuality, what Mr. Lompart created was a private parking area on a City street. It also interfered with the street cleaning unit's ability to clear the area next to the curb. Finally, the instructions and recommendations, and the reasons for them, were set forth in a memo to the Streets Department dated March 29, 1988. A copy is attached for your convenience. June 20, 1988 Complaint of Michael Lompart Wage Two Hopefully, this will explain the reasons for the work and clarify the actual facts surrounding V.a project. If you require any additi )nal information or clarification, please contact me. Tha R BERT J. GERMAN RJG:jgj Attachment EPARMT IVISIt �. �"�"""A1'E - AC CT. ROJEt"-P DESCRIPTION 11 7-i A- �_,�� tc�) -Ih TN T,�+-lC. a DCATION 0. N rr 4- e A ILL TID . ame Address DUIPAIENT ABOR — 7- j7 ATERIAL - eer - E, Ar s • 7 er r 1, ti r S. @ er hr n am 32 OTAL EQUIPMENT S0.0 0 OTAL LABOR `� 7 9 �2 TAX"''_ OTAL MATERIAL S 0, 2 i TOTAL'?.S�C�. � 7 UBTOTAL 5% OVERHEAD .. RAND TOTAL D�}EH' MARCH 29, 1988 TO: Greg Woods, Streets Supervisor FROM: Risk Manager RE: Safety Inspection of 2025 Chestnut On 3/28/88, a safety inspection was conducted at 2025 Chestnut. The inspection revealed the existence of non -city curbing in the traffic lane. The curbing creates a safety hazard for traffic in the area and prevents the street sweeping equipment from having access to the curb area near the city sidewalk. It is therefore recommended that: 1. the nonconforming asphalt curbing be removed from the traffic lane; 2. the two concrete curb sections be removed from in front of the reflector posts; 3. an A/C burm be installed in front of the reflector posts in a manner that will not block the rain gutter next to the sidewalk area; 4. the new A/C �.burm be painted with a white fog line so as to be visible at night; 5, the reflectors on the metal posts be replaced with larger, more visible units; and 6. the east end of the sidewalk be connected to the A/C walkway area by the installation of an additional A/C walkway in order to eliminate the need for pedestrians to walk in the street. If you have any questions, please contact me. Thank you. i Robert J. German RJG : ECW C:: Assistant City Manager Director of Utilities/Maintenance Traffic Engineer Larry Willey Chuck Mitchell 1�C0 �1n St�ee� Carlshad. �A 920�2 June 15, 1988 We are t�e electe� �oard Members o� the Santa Fe 9id�e Hone �ssoc|atinr. �s such` we o:st re�ryyest t!� intere ts f ow»er� members n; Eanta Fe �i�ge. Even �hough we'are way sut o a�ltthe suutheastero tip uf Carlsbad, we dc hope tha� you w�ll nere a1a�4e ,ur concerns �: regard to the propcsed develupment �y L��p`o�C �e Whjle �e realize tha� this area bounded by El Camino Real o th west an� Rancho Sarta Fe on tbe east most certainly wi1I no» e remain in its prapparal conUition we do hope and z anticipate that any improvements would b ` as absolutely necessery Of majo e as minimally disruptive for tren�ydousl i ^ r coocern to us is the potemtial inevitabln effeyt ncreased traffic f]ow prcblelms that will most / c our presunt living conditicns Pon Proposed major rmad, Calle Barcelcx�a extension,as^pIanned be loc t d contigucx/s to our hooes and wouId be of focr lane ith a e limit of 40MPH. The associated nais i�z s w a speed conditions and potentials for creati e, ncreased traffic children is of great conrern to l ng unsafe conditions for our emphatically that since this roaa�i o� us^ Hay we suggest most developmen+ our! not t�e present ue sdproposed to serve this nem wiser am'airer to move this r sz ents, it would be d irfini�el� . ` s wad to the center of the deveIopment in brder to bet�er serve their needs d t new the amblence of omr neighborhood As presentl an ro maintain highway would be oil g7Iy objectio`. Men abIe h y P/anne�` t�e new 'complelod. Other ooncerns regardiog density, water and sewage a`'ailabilit and zther factors I rea]ize are being addresse� i�y ns�ny other y residents of Ohs surrounding area. �� are not stating that since we made it i:o Carlsbad, ot`^ers sho*ld not be permitted Ne are reguesting tbat fair use - i" regard Lo the environ�en� th deve1z�er and to our neighborhoo� - be made of thi land c� e alI residents may indeed continue to safely en�oy she - asoithatf our area o� Carlsbad. ~= ^^ =� w Thank you for your interest in t/lis matter and please kseF us �m+ormed of any activities or potential decisiuns a th L p tn our concerns, may relats Sincerely` Edward Q. Fox, Cr.P.H., President J l "� esident .=,y�,cc �ureczn�, �ember