Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-01-22; City Council; 16532; Construction of a Cul-De-Sac Bulb on Althea Lane4 CITY OF CARLSBAD -AGENDA BILL AB# IL! 533 TITLE: DIRECT STAFF ON MTG. 1-22-02 THE CONSTRUCTION OF A CUL-DE-SAC BULB ON ALTHEA LANE DEPT.HDv2F CITY Am. DEPT. ENG CITY MGR. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Direct staff to wait for a private funding source before implementing the construction of the cul-de-sac bulb on Althea Lane. ITEM EXPLANATION: Althea Lane was constructed in 1962 with the Valley Manor subdivision and stubbed to the easterly subdivision boundary. The adjacent property, between the Valley Manor subdivision and Park Drive, was subdivided in 1982 as Parcel Map 12016, with Parcels 1 and 2 fronting on Park Drive, and Parcels 3 and 4 fronting on a proposed cul-de-sac at the end of Althea Lane. The developer of the parcel map dedicated right-of-way for his portion of the cul-de-sac. Parcels 3 and 4 were purchased by Scott A. and Laura A. Koop ("Koop") and August0 A. and Margaret E. Gorgueiro ("Gorgueiro"), owner constructed any surface improvements to Althea Lane. The remainder of the future Althea respectively. Both owners signed a Future Improvement Agreement ("FIA) and built a home. Neither Lane cul-de-sac is on property currently owned by John K. and Frances V. Fisler ("Fisler") which can be subdivided in the future. Fisler requests, in a letter dated October 12, 2001, that the City complete the Althea Lane cul-de-sac by implementing the two existing FIA's and constructing sidewalk and pavement, at public expense, for the portion of the cul-de-sac on his property. Fisler would dedicate the right-of-way for it. Staff has identified three alternative courses of action relating to Althea Lane improvements Alternative 1. Wait for a Private Fundina Source The cul-de-sac area is currently constructed of aggregate base material. It is providing adequate developed, or another private funding source is approved, the FlAs would be implemented and the access to the two residences, trash pick up and emergency services. When the Fisler property is entire cul-de-sac improved at the same time. Alternative 2. Proceed with lmplementina the FlAs to Construct Partial Improvements remainder of the cul-de-sac improvements would be constructed in the future when the Fisler Direct Koop and Gorgueiro to construct their respective portions of the cul-de-sac at this time. The property develops. Alternative 3. Per Fisler's Request, Proceed with lmplernentinq FlAs and Construct the Remainder of Improvements at Public Expense. Direct Koop and Gorgueiro to construct their respective portions of the cul-de-sac. The remainder of the pavement and sidewalk would be constructed by the City as a City project. The City's estimated cost is $12,400. I DISCUSSION OF ALTERNATIVES: Staff recommends Alternative 1. Since the existing condition of the cul-de-sac does not cause a public health, safety or welfare issue, there is no immediate need for the improvements to be constructed. Constructing improvements, on Fisler's property, at the public's expense is not considered an appropriate use of public funds. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Since the recommendation is for no construction at this time, no environmental review is required. However, if one of the other alternatives are chosen, the proposed street improvements on Althea upon the environment per City approval dated March 24, 1980. Lane were examined with Minor Subdivision No. 426 and declared to have an insignificant impact FISCAL IMPACT: estimated at $12,400, There is no fiscal impact to the city for alternatives 1 and 2. The fiscal impact for alternative 3 is EXHIBITS: 1. Location Map. 2. October 12, 2001 letter from Mr. Fisler. 3. Various correspondence. 2 I LOCATION MAP NOT TO SCALE I . . I PROJECT NAME ALTHEA LANE I c C! October 12, 2001 City of Carlsbad Zauncil ;;embers: m In a recent conversation xith ;,izy')r Lewis I was asked to restate our posi.tion: regarding .the cul-de-sac an Althea Lane. If the City of Carlsbad will conscruct and pay for the portion on our property, we will give the ilroprcy to the city. .'?he size of -this portion is 2,609 sq. feet and h.3~ a value of $~~looo based on the ;rice of vacmt land in the area. I:either us, ;:ur heirs or anyone else would ever have to repay these c3cts. ::'hen we built our home in 1971, luwre ircprovement agreements were n0.t required. :;!z were not mare that a cul-de-sac was planned as Blthea Lane was jusl- a dead en2 srreet. ?he purchase'grice would have been ;r:uch cheaper if knowledge sf a cul-de-sac were known. The other two pro2ert.y cwners (Do? &.;orgueiro) signed 2.1.;~'~ and kncw they would have to pay for their i2ortions of -the cul-de-sac. Y,JU also know about the ouz of pocket costs and inconvenience to us for over 20 years of private and city street drainage :.:ater being dumped on our property with no wrizten pernisoion or eaoernent, breaking the cities own code. Ref. sectisn 15..16 170 B-2. 'iherl curbs and side- walks were constructed x1 I'ark 3r. we gave the city &he 15 f.t. sb con- demnation would not be Pecessary. Gur gain from this was trafl'ic noise 15 i't. fr3n our fnnt bedmom. Reviewing the above, 1'" ... sure 'you can understand why we do not feel it fair for to 11s as prolierty us to pay for portion of the cul-de-sac. :here is no value the cul-de-sac takes a Large I;cJrthwest cJrner out of our leaving a large ijisce in :he Southwest cJrner useless. considsrztion of this matter. Carlsbad, 2-1 92008 :'ark Dr. April 5, 2001 TO: CITY MANAGER FROM: Public Works Director Item Distributed . RP COPV FISLERlALTHEA LANE CONSTRUCTION Attached are numerous correspondences related to Mr. Fisler's request to complete Althea Lane. Mr. Fisler has withdrawn his request to complete the street and has no interest in pursuing it further. Staff has discussed the matter with Koop and Gorgueiro and all are happy with the status quo. If you concur we will formally notify Koop and Gorgueiro that no further action on Althea Lane will be pursued at this time. LLOYD Public 6dp.E. Works B. Director n Attachments LBH:brg All Receive-Agenda Item# \ For the Information of the: cmcouNcIL / \ 11. a84L15.557 - AP DVAL OF -SION AND AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO, AG- 70 No. 34693. ACTION On a motion by Council Member Fimib. Council adoptcd WOLWTION NO, accepting mdividuai donations and in-kind sawices totaling six thomd one hundred and eighty dollam (S6,lSO) in support olf the dedication of the 21sL Annual BcdysUmag and Bodyboarding Championships. BXES: IyQLs: Lewis, Hall, Firmit, Nygaard, Kulchio NonS 9. @ #15556-VAL. OF FUTURE 91EgovBMENT FOR WL-DES" .~ __ Bob Woick- Re: Althea Lane Memo to Ray Page I I To: From: Bob Wojcik Date: 2/23/01 10:43AM Lloyd Hubbs Subject: Re: Althea Lane Memo to Ray Glen Van Pesky personally spoke with the Koops and Gurguiero to inform them about our recommendation to "leave things as they are". Neither of them where unhappy about this. Once we get Ray's concurrence we will follow up with a letter to rhern. FYI Attached is tne memo to Ray via you on our recommendation, >>> Lloyd Hubbs 02/22/01 08:57AM >>> Bob, did we check with the other folks on Althea about the FINS? cc: Belinda Guzman November 20, 2000 John K. Fisler 3975 Park Drive Carisbad, CA 92008 ALTHEA LANE CUL-DE-SAC Your letter dated October 17, 2000 to the City Council members has been forwarded to me for response. As you are aware, I have been involved with this issue for quite some time and am very familiar with the situation in that area. The City is interested in completing the cul-de-sac improvements. At this point, it is a matter of when those improvements will go in and how they will be financed and constructed. As with all matters brought before the City Council, options for their review and discussion must be prepared, fully analyzed and a recommendation proposed by staff before the Council can make an informed decision. At this point, a fixed date to bring the matter to the City Council has not been set. I would anticipate the item going to City Council in the first quarter of 2001. The City has been and will be sensitive to the fact that this matter impacts several of its citizens. Like yourself, they have limited resources with which to construct their obligations. It is because of these sensitivities, that the City now finds itself in this position. We will continue in our attempts to come up with a fair and reasonable solution to this issue, One option I would like to your response on is the following: Your portion of the right of way would be dedicated as you have offered. Construction of the cul-de sac would take place with the cost being shared by all three property owners. The City may be willing to put in your share of the cost with a reimbursement agreement with you. That cost would be reimbursed when and if your property is subdivided. Thereby making it possible for you to not have to invest any money at this time. Please call or write to me with your response to this option. If you have any further questions, please contact me at 602-2733 Sincerely, ROBERT J. WOJCIK, P.E. Deputy City Engineer RJW:jb C: Public Works Director Fire Marshal Management Analyst, Joe Garuba Senior Civil Engineer, Skip Hammann August 10,2000 TO: GtTY MANAGER' . ~ .. VIA: Public Works Director ~ ~ .. .~ .. FROM: Deputy City Engineer, Land Development .. . . . .., . .. . .. ALTHEA LANE,IMpROVEMENTS- . ~. : ,',~~:..,; :.. ,~%_..(. .I.~, .., . -, ,i. .. ~ .. ~~ , .~,. ,. , .. ~. , . .. . -..., ij _,: ~.~,.~ . . . ~ ..~ . , ... i. " .~ ~...,_ii _L..l.l. .."~:.:, , ..~. .~_~, ~,. .. .. ,. .. b . ~ .~ . .~ ~ ., . ..,.... . ~ .. ..... . ..~ . ,.~. .. .. . .. ..~, .~ ., .. ~. -~ . .. . ~. .~ .. .. ~. At the request of the City Council and the direction of Lloyd Hubbs, I have prepared the the situation was brought about when staff submitted an Agenda Bill requesting Council's' following information based on my research of the available City documents. As you remember direction on implementing two Future Improvement Agreements. Those agreements were on the Koop's and Gorgueiro's property to install improvements to their half of the CUI de sac bulb on Althea Lane. At the public hearing a Mr. John Fisler, who owns approximately half of what will be the Althea Lane CUI de sac bulb, requested the City pay for his portion of the street improvements. (It was at his request that staff submitted the Agenda Bill.) Mr. Fisler brought up the issue of drainage onto his property causing alleged damage, thus his request for City mitigation. At that point the discussion focused on that drainage and claims that the City approved diversions of drainage through various properties including Koop's and Fisler's. The Fisler's also requested some form of relief from the City to reimburse them for drainage facilities they constructed. Those facilities were required by the City when the Koops graded their property and built their home. (A plan is attached to orient you to the area and ownership of properties along with showing the natural drainage flow.) There are three main areas of concern: 1) what was the historical flow of drainage prior to Mr. Jack Kubota's subdivision in the Park DriveIAlthea Lane area: 2) did the City err in directiy or approving the Kubota drainage plan and any subsequent drainage plans for that area: and 3) who should fund the 'street improvements, if any, on Althea Lane (Althea is designated a compatible street for standard improvements). From the Parcel Split No. 174 files, for Jack Kubota's subdivision, I found quite a bit of correspondence on the drainage issue's historic flow. There is an unsigned memo in that file that is labeled, "Park Drive Drainage History". The first entry of the chronology in that memo, refers to Carlsbad Highlands and is dated 1950. That memo also notes, "this is a natural drainage course". I found a very old topo map, which confirms this. All of this documents the location of the historic drainage flow. Searching through additional plans, I found a Dwg. No. 104-6 that shows an existing inlet and pipe crossing Park Drive, at Mr. Kabota's subdivision. The drawing is dated 1957 and signed by the City Engineer, Jack Kubota (his subdivision was not done until 1973). That inlet took the drainage from the southeasterly side of Park Drive and emptied into the natural channel on the northwesterly side of Park, which leads to the Koop and Fisler properties. I spoke with Mr. Kubota about what drainage course existed there in 1957. He answered that when he came to the City in 1950, the inlet on the southeasterly side of Park Drive already existed. This is consistent with the "drainage history" memo and chronology I found in the file. I also found City Dwg. No. 108-3 dated March 1957 signed by Jack Kubota labeled, "Park Drive Drainage Study". That drawing also shows an existing inlet and drain that emptied on the August IO. 2000 ALTHEA LANE IMPROVEMENTS Page 2 northwesterly side of Park into the natural channel. This is consistent with the other found documents. Mr. Kubota's subdivision of 1973 was conditioned to prepare a grading and drainage plan and construct facilities to take waters from upsiream, via an extension to that existing pipe, across his property. The outlet of those facilities is located in the same drainage channel as historically existed. A Mr. Stauss, who had owned the Koop and Gorgueiro's parcels, spoke at the Council hearing. He stated that it was Mr. Kubota's, City required and approved drainage improvements of 1973, that diverted the water and caused the drainage problem on his and Mr. Fisler's property, However, I found a "record of oral information" from a City staff member that records his discussion with Mr. Stauss. Per that record dated 1973, Mr. Stauss said, "drainage was illegally diverted IO+ years ago". This is not consistent with Mr. Stauss' current claim that the drainage problem started with the Kubota subdivision. It is my conclusion, based on the facts found, that: 1) there was a natural drainage channel on all of the subject properties (from Kubota's parcel to Fisler's parcel and beyond); 2) an inlet and pipe crossing of Park Drive existed prior to 1957 and perhaps as early as 1950 maintaining that natural drainage channel; 3) Mr. Kubota extended that same pipe in 1973 discharging the the cause of the drainage problem now being claimed by Mr. Fisler and Mr. Stauss; 5) the drainage into that same natural channel; 4) the City action to require that pipe extension was not natural historic flow of drainage has been maintained and the City did not err in its actions; and 6) neither Mr. Fisler nor the Koops have a valid claim for City mitigation regarding this drainage. The attached is a copy of the March 1957 drawing labeled "Park Drive Drainage Survey". I have supplemented information on that plan with the names of property owners and some additional property lines for clarification. The City has four options that it can follow in regard to street improvements. The first option would be to do nothing and leave the existing drainage and street improvements, or lack thereof, to remain for the present time. Option number 2 would be to call the FIAs of Koop and Gorgueiro to build their portion of the CUI de sac and wait for the Fisler property to develop and install improvements in the future. Option number 3 would be to form an assessment district, the Koop's and Gorgueiro's to construct their portions of the cul-de-sac on Althea Lane. Option involving the Fisler property, to dedicate and construct his portion of Althea Lane and require number 4 would be for the City to make the completion of Althea Lane a CIP project using City funds. Staffs recommendation would be option number 3. This option spreads the cost evenly among the three property owners of the CUI de sac. We are exploring the process involved and will return to council when complete information is available. Please let me know if you require any additional information or documentation. RJW:jb Attachment Attachment: Fisler letter, dated January 11, 2001 WCEIVED ?here is nc reascn for me to be involved with the cul-de-sac. I do not want it and never have. Xo one would want-a project that would cut out the, cen~er. of your properzy lezving a portion unbuildable, if a future eir.e desired to build. For over 20 sme years we have been inccnvenienced by the City of Carlsbad nothing shall be done allowing any earthen material to wash on the pre- breaking their own codes. 3ef. Section 15.16 170 3-2. This states that mises cf ano.ther without written consent. There never was consent nor easemnt asked for. Mayor Lewis viewed the probleo: personally in 139'3. His statement to ne was, John I will check into this. If the City caused these problems we will maice iz right. i4akin.g it right to me means retrobution for mistakes. In this case it neans the :icy paying for the cul-cie-sac portion on our over 20 years of violations is unreasonable. If the council does not lot,. 3or us to dona.te property worth about $15,000.00 and put up with feel the same way, I am sorry. a ietter Stating that they did not want to handle it as a violation of L, recent exoerience with the City on the fill en said property, produced the arainance, but if that became necessary, serious financial conseq- uences would be forthcoming. It seems we have two different:sets of rules. I see no need to bring chis up again at a council meeting unless the City Your letter says you will continue toward a fair and reasonable solution. is ready to make things right and pay for the third of the cul-de-sac. There is only one fair solution as stated. $t my last agenda on January 3,2000, I was given less than 5 minutes for my presentation while others with no agenda were given over 15 minutes. I see no value for rre to request an agenda or engage in further discussion. ... ., .. . . - 760 723-7555 V February 7,2001 S,cott and Laura Koop 3886 Althea Lane Carlsbad, CA 92008 IMPROVEMENTS TO THE ALTHEA LANE CUL-DE-SAC This is a written confirmation of the contact that the City had with you last week regarding your Future Improvement Agreement. At this time, the City is no longer pursuing the immediate construction of the improvements to the Althea Lane cul-de-sac. We will continue to hold on to your Future Improvement Agreement so that if and when the improvements are put in, you would be paying your fair share. No actions are required on your part. If you have any questions, please contact me at 602-2733 Sincerely, ROBERT J. WOJCIK, P.E. Deputy City Engineer RJW:jd C: R. Thomas Wood February 7,2001 August0 and Margaret Gorgueiro 3880 Althea Lane Carlsbad, CA 92008 IMPROVEMENTS TO THE ALTHEA LANE CUL-DE-SAC This is a written confirmation of the contact that the City had with you last week regarding your Future Improvement Agreement. At this time, the City is no longer pursuing the immediate construction of the improvements to the Althea Lane cul-de-sac. We will continue to hold on to your Future Improvement Agreement so that if and when the improvements are put in, you would be paying your fair share. No actions are required on your part. If you have any questions, please contact me at 602-2733 Sincerely, ROBERT J. WOJCIK, P.E. Deputy City Engineer RJW:jd C: R. Thomas Wood February 23,2001 TO: CITY MANAGER VIA: Public Works Director FROM: Deputy City Engineer, Development Services MR. FlSLERlALTHEA LANE CUL-DE-SAC Over the past year, we have had numerous contacts with Mr. Fisler regarding his request, at a Council hearing, for the completion of the Althea Lane cul-de-sac, On January 11, 2001, Mr. Fisler delivered a letter to our office. It was a response letter to an offer we made to him that we thought would be equitable. In his letter he writes, "There is no reason for me to be involved with the cul-de-sac. I do not want it and never have". "I see no need to bring this up again at a Council meeting unless the City is ready to make things right and pay for the third of the cul-de-sac". As Mr. Fisler does not appear willinq to neqotiate with us on this matter, and because he is also droppinq the issue of the cul-de-sac. we are considerinq this matter closed. We have contacted the other two owners involved, the Koops and Gurgueiros, and informed them that the city will hold their Future Improvement Agreements and NOT require them to put in their portion of the cul-de-sac, at this time. Since they were informed in writing that we were requiring the improvements we will mail out a new letter once we have your concurrence. Regarding the existing condition of the cul-de-sac, both the waste management company and the City's Fire Department were contacted to determine if they experienced or foresaw any problems in providing service on that cul-de-sac, Both parties responded that they did not know of any past problems and do not have any present problems with the existing cul-de-sac, Since there are no safety, service or access problems, and the fact that Mr. Fisler has withdrawn his requests regarding the cul-de-sac, we will be doinq no further work on this matter unless directed. If you have any questions, please contact me at extension 2733. ROBERT J. WOJCIK, P.E. Deputy City Engineer RJW:jd n July 5, 2001 TO: CITY MANAGER .A VIA: Public Works FROM: Deputy City Engineer, Land Development ALTHEA LANE CUL-DE-SAC As Mr. Fisler states in his letter (attached) to the Mayor dated June 4, 2001, his offer is a repeat of his October 17, 2000 correspondence in which he offers to dedicate the right of way for Althea Lane if the City pays for his portion of the street improvements. He also repeats his claim of illegal drainage due to City development approvals. Attached is a letter dated November 20, 2000 that I sent to Mr. Fisler. It states staffs position concerning dedication, improvements and reimbursements. Also attached is a memo dated August 7, 2000 spelling out the facts that I was able to find in my research back to 1957 concerning Mr. Fisler's drainage complaint. A summary of that memo is that Mr. Fisler's claim of damage due to City approvals is unfounded. The drainage going across his property has done so since 1957 and before. That watercourse is a natural and historic course of ftow which was not diverted by the City. Therefore, the City did nothing wrong in subsequent approvals of development upstream. Since Mr. Fisler's request is based on this claim of improper actions of the City, staff does not support his request. Staffs recommendation is the same stated in the November 20 letter. That is, if Mr. Fisler is willing to dedicate the right-of-way, the City would have the Koop's and Gorgueiro's pay for their share of the improvements. The City would pay for Mr. Fisler's share of the improvements if Mr. Fisler also signed a reimbursement agreement. The agreement would state, that if and when his property is subdivided in the future, he or the new owner would reimburse the City for our contribution. This offer would give Mr. Fisler his requested improvements with no immediate cost to him. ROBERT J. WOJCIK, P.E. Deputy City Engineer RJW:jd Attachments August 7, 2000 TO: CITY MANAGER VIA: Public Works Director FROM: Deputy City Engineer, Land Development ALTHEA LANE IMPROVEMENTS At the request of the City Council and the direction of Lloyd Hubbs, I have prepared the following information based on my research of the available City documents. The two main areas of concern are: 1) what was the historical flow of drainage prior to Mr. Jack Kuboda's subdivision; and 2) did the City error in directing or approving the Kuboda drainage plan and any subsequent drainage plans for that area. From the parcel split no. 174 files for Jack Kuboda's property, I found quite a bit of correspondence on the drainage issue. There is an unsigned memo in that file that is labeled, "Park Drive Drainage History". The first entry refers to Carlsbad Highlands 1950. That memo also notes, "this is a natural drainage course". I found a very old topo map which confirms this. Searching through our plans, I found a Dwg. No. 104-6 that shows existing inlets and pipe crossing at the subject location. The drawing is dated 1957 signed by the City Engineer, Jack Kuboda (his subdivision was not done until 1973). That inlet took the drainage from the the park. I spoke with Mr. Kuboda about what drainage course existed there in 1957. southeasterly side of Park Drive and emptied into a natural channel on the northwesterly side of He answered that when he came to the City in 1950, the inlet on the southeasterly side of file. I also found City Dwg. No. 108-3 dated March 1957 signed by Jack Kuboda labeled, Park Drive already existed. This is consistent with the "drainage history" memo I. found in the "Park Drive Drainage Study". That drawing also shows an existing inlet and drain that emptied on the northwesterly side of Park into a natural channel. Mr. Kubota's subdivision of 1973 was conditioned requiring a "grading and drainage plan" to take waters from upstream across his property. Mr. Kuboda said that condition is correct and he constructed an "extension to the existing pipe" which stills outlets into the same drainage channel as historically existed. I found a "record of oral information" from a City staff member that records his discussion with Mr. Stauss. Per that record dated 1973, Mr. Stauss said, "drainage was illegally diverted IO+ years ago". This is not consistent with Mr. Stauss' current claim that the drainage problem started with the Kuboda subdivision. It is my conclusion based on the facts found that: 1) there was a natural drainage channel on all of the subject properties (from Kuboda's parcel to Stauss' parcel and beyond): 2) an inlet and pipe crossing'existed prior to 1957 and perhaps as early as 1950; 3) Mr. Kuboda extended the existing pipe in 1973; 4) Mr. Stauss said that the problem started ten plus years prior to 1973; 5) the City action to require that pipe extension was not because of the drainage problem now being claimed by Mr. Fisler; and 6) the natural historic flow of drainage has been maintained. August 7,2000 ALTHEA LANE IMPROVEMENTS Page 2 I have attached a copy of the March 1957 drawing that the City has labeled "Park Drive Drainage Survey". I have supplemented information on that plan with the names of property owners and some additional lines for clarification. At this point, the City has three options that it can follow. The first option would be to do nothing and leave the existing drainage and improvements or lack thereof to remain for the present time. Option number 2 would be to form an assessment district involving the Fisler property and require the Koop's and Gorgueiro's to construct their portions of the cul-de-sac on Althea Lane. Option number 3 would be for the City to make the completion of Althea Lane a CIP project using City funds. Please let me know if you require any additional information or documentation ROBERT J. WOJCIK, P.E. Deputy City Engineer RJW:jb Attachment November 20, 2000 3975 Park Drive John K. Fisler Carlsbad. CA 92008 ALTHEA LANE CUL-DE-SAC Your letter dated October 17, 2000 to the City Council members has been forwarded to me for response. As you are aware, I have been involved with this issue for quite some time and am very familiar with the situation in that area. The City is interested in completing the cul-de-sac improvements. At this point, it is a matter of when.those improvements will go in and how they wi!! be finzgcec! and c9nstructed. As with all matters brought before the City Council, options for their review and discussion must be prepared, fully analyzed and a recommendation proposed by staff before the Council can make an informed decision. At this point, a fixed date to bring the matter to the City Council has not been set. I would anticipate the item going to City Council in the first quarter of 2001. The City has been and will be sensitive to the fact that this matter impacts several of its citizens. Like yourself, they have limited resources with which to construct their obligations. It is because of these sensitivities, that the City now finds itself in this position. We will continue in our attempts to come up with a fair and reasonable solution to this issue, One option I would like to your response on is the following: Your portion of the right of way would be dedicated as you have offered. Construction of the cul-de sac would take place with the cost being shared by all three property owners. The City may be willing to put in your share of the cost with a reimbursement agreement with you. That cost wouid be reimbursed when and if your property is subdivided. Thereby making it possible for you to not have to invest any money at this time. Please call or write to me with your response to this option. If you have any further questions, please contact me at 602-2733. Sincerely, /,& ' I wpw+ ROBERT J. WOJCIK, P.E. Deputy City Engineer RJW:jb C: Public Works Director Fire Marshal Management Analyst, Joe Garuba Senior Civll Engineer, Skip Hammann 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008.7314 (760) 602-2720 FAX (760) 602-8562 @ June 27,2001 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT TO: CITY COUNCIL \ FROM: MAYOR LEWIS ALTHEA LANE CUL-DE-SAC Attached is a letter from John Fisler in which he is again offering to donate a portion o his land (with certain conditions) for the cul-de-sac on Althea Lane. to the Public Works Director (via the City Manager) for / Mayor mhs Attachment c: City Manager h ivne 04, 2001 Attention: Mayor Lewis 'City. of Carlsbad As stated in our letters of 11/17/00 and 01/11/01, the donation of our property for the cul-de-sac on Althea Lane was withdrawn. However, to be good neighbors, we will again make the offer. It seems that I have been unable to explain our position so that everyone under- one third portion with no cost to us now or ever. There is to be no stands. This offer, as before is contingent on the City installing our reimbursement agreement as suggested by Engineering in the letter of 11/20/00. ';;e will only pay for curb on this portion. We are not offering participation. The City has been routing for over with neighbors water across our property:b on the way to discharge on Twenty years, street water containing oil and Contamination CO-mingled inconvenience and financial cost. We consider this to be abuse by the Tamarack, without permission or an easement. 'This has caused great City since it is in direct violation of the Cities own codes, (see doubt concerning the outcome. enclosure).' If this were presented in a court of law, there is no over $30,000.00 based on lot costs presently on the market, it is far Taking this into consideration, giving 2600 sq. ft. of land, worth more than we should do. In fact, this retrobution is of value only to of our property leaving a lot if ever divided, that would be very dif- other residents on Althea Lane. We end up with .a large chunk taken out ficult to use for anything, 1N;M.l QQJNID~J, If anyone can prove to us that an odd dog-leg shaped lot is worth more than the full lot, I would like to discuss it with you. Condemnation would be far more fair. We would then receive fair market value of the portion taken to repay us for the wrong. Sincerelv. Carlsbad, CA 9~008 November 20.2000 John K. Fisler 3975 Park Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008 ALTHEA LANE CUL-DE-SAC Your letter dated October 17, 2000 to the City Council members has been forwarded to me for response. As you are aware, I have been involved with this issue for quite some time and am very familiar with the situation in that area. The City is interested in completing the cul-de-sac improvements. At this point, it is a matter of when those improvements will go in and how they wi!! be fi!?_ancec! cms!mc!z!,. As with all matters brought before the City Council, options for their review and discussion must be prepared, fully analyzed and a recommendation proposed by staff before the Council can make an informed decision. At this point, a fixed date to bring the matter to the City Council has not been set. I would anticipate the item going to City Council in the first quarter of 2001. The City has been and will be sensitive to the fact that this matter impacts several of its citizens. Like yourse!f, they have limited resources with which to construct their obligations. It is because of these sensitivities, that the City now finds itself in this position. We will continue in our attempts to come up with a fair and reasonable solution to this issue. One option I would like to your response on is the following: Your portion of the right of way would be dedicated as you have offered. Construction of the cul-de sac would take place with the cost being shared by all three property owners. The City may be willing to put in your share of the cost with a reimbursement agreement with you. That cost would be reimbursed when and if your property is subdivided. Thereby making it possible for you to not have to invest any money at this time. Please call or write to me with your response to this option. 0.3 I I/ If you have any further questions, please contact me at 602-2733. Sincerely. /+&-qg&w+ ROBERT J. WOJCIK, P.E. Deputy City Engineer RJW:jb C: Public Works Director Fire Marshal Management Analyst, Joe Garuba Senior Civil Engineer, Skip Hammann To: From: Frank Mannen 9/26/01 1026AM Bob Wojcik Subject: Date: Re: Mr.Fisler FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE ClTYCOUNClV 9mleCIN MAN- ASS . CITYMANAGER Bob, will evaluate it and get back to him. Thanks for the info. I am going to advise the Mayor to tell Mr. Fisler to put his proposal in writing and we >>> Bob Wojcik 09/24/01 04:27PM >>> Here's the attachment I mentioned in my voice mail to you today. (Mr.Fisl1 .doc) (Althea Lane Improvement) In case the Mayor forgot some of the history on this, I have attached a memo on some of my research. Let me know what the marching orders are From: Bob Wojcik To: Frank Mannen Date: 9/25/01 3:56PM Subject: Mr.Fisler Here's the attachment I mentioned in my voice mail to you today. (Mr.Fisll.doc) In case the Mayor forgot some of the history on this, I have attached a memo on some of my research. (Althea Lane Improvement) Let me know what the marching orders are. cc: Lloyd Hubbs February 23,2001 TO: CITY MANAGER VIA: Public Works Director FROM: Deputy City Engineer, Development Services MR. FISLEWALTHEA LANE CUL-DE-SAC Over the past year, we have had numerous contacts with Mr. Fisler regarding his request, at a Council hearing, for the completion of the Althea Lane cul-de-sac. On January 1 1, 2001, Mr. Fisler delivered a letter to our office. It was a response letter to an offer we made to him that we thought would be equitable. In his letter he writes, "There is no reason for me to be involved with the cul-de-sac. I do not want it and never have". "I see no need to bring this up again at a Council meeting unless the City is ready to make things right and pay for the third of the cul-de-sac". As Mr. Fisler does not appear willinq to nenotiate with us on this matter, and because he is also droppinn the issue of the cul-de-sac, we are considerinq this matter closed. We have contacted the other two owners involved, the Koops and Gurgueiros, and informed them that the city will hold their Future Improvement Agreements and NOT require them to put in their portion of the cul-de-sac, at this time. Since they were informed in writing that we were requiring the improvements we will mail out a new letter once we have vour concurrence. Regarding the existing condition of the cul-de-sac, both the waste management company and the City's Fire Department were contacted to determine if they experienced or foresaw any problems in providing service on that cul-de-sac. Both parties responded that they did not know of any past problems and do not have any present problems with the existing cul-de-sac. Since there are no safety, service or access problems, and the fact that Mr. Fisler has withdrawn his requests regarding the cul-de-sac, we will be doina no further work on this matter unless directed. If you have any questions, please contact me at extension 2733 ROBERT J. WOJCIK, P.E. ' Deputy City Engineer August 7, 2000 TO: CITY MANAGER VIA: Public Works Director FROM: Deputy City Engineer, Land Development Althea lane improvements At the request of the City Council and the direction of Lloyd Hubbs, I have prepared the following information based on my research of the available City documents. The two main areas of concern are: 1) what was the historical flow of drainage prior to Mr. Jack Kuboda's subdivision; and 2) did the City error in directing or approving the Kuboda drainage plan and any subsequent drainage plans for that area. From the parcel split no. 174 files for Jack Kuboda's property, I found quite a bit of correspondence on the drainage issue. There is an unsigned memo in that file that is labeled, "Park Drive Drainage History". The first entry refers to Carlsbad Highlands 1950. That memo also notes, "this is a natural drainage course". I found a very old topo map which confirms this. Searching through our plans, I found a Dwg. No. 104-6 that shows existing inlets and pipe crossing at the subject location. The drawing is dated 1957 signed by the City Engineer, Jack Kuboda (his subdivision was not done until 1973). That inlet took the drainage from the southeasterly side of Park Drive and emptied into a natural channel on the northwesterly side of the park. I spoke with Mr. Kuboda about what drainage course existed there in 1957. He answered that when he came to the City in 1950, the inlet on the southeasterly side of Park Drive already existed. This is consistent with the "drainage history" memo I found in the file. I also found City Dwg. No. 108-3 dated March 1957 signed by Jack Kuboda labeled, "Park Drive Drainage Study", That drawing also shows an existing inlet and drain that emptied on the northwesterly side of Park into a natural channel. Mr. Kubota's subdivision of 1973 was conditioned requiring a "grading and drainage plan" to take waters from upstream across his property. Mr. Kuboda said that condition is correct and he constructed an "extension to the existing pipe" which stills outlets into the same drainage channel as historically existed. I found a "record of oral information" from a City staff member that records his discussion with Mr. Stauss. Per that record dated 1973, Mr. Stauss said, "drainage was illegally diverted IO+ years ago". This is not consistent with Mr. Stauss' current claim that the drainage problem started with the Kuboda subdivision. It is my conclusion based on the facts found that: 1) there was a natural drainage channel on all of the subject properties (from Kuboda's parcel to Stauss' parcel and beyond); 2) an inlet and pipe crossing existed prior to 1957 and perhaps as early as 1950; 3) Mr. Kuboda extended the existing pipe in 1973; 4) Mr. Stauss said that the problem started ten plus years prior to 1973; 5) the City action to require that pipe extension was not because of the drainage problem now being claimed by Mr. Fisler; and 6) the natural historic flow of drainage has been maintained. August 7, 2000 Althea lane improvements Page 2 I have attached a copy of the March 1957 drawing that the City has labeled "Park Drive Drainage Survey". I have supplemented information on that plan with the names of property owners and some additional lines for clarification. At this point, the City has three options that it can follow. The first option would be to do nothing and leave the existing drainage and improvements or lack thereof to remain for the present time. Option number 2 would be to form an assessment district involving the Fisler property and require the Koop's and Gorgueiro's to construct their portions of the cul-de-sac on Althea Lane. Option number 3 would be for the City to make the completion of Althea Lane a CIP project using City funds. Please let me know if you require any additional information or documentation ROBERT J. WOJCIK, P.E. Deputy City Engineer RJW:jb Attachment AGENDA lTEM #12 Agenda Bill - 16,532 Althea Lane Cul-de-sac ALTERNATIVE Recommendation : Authorize staff to proceed with the construction of the cul-de-sac at the end of Althea Lane subject to the following conditions: 1) Property owner (Fisler) enters into a Future ""'Payment Agreement with the City. Property owner (Fisler) will dedicate road right-of-way to the City. City will pay for the cost of improvements on the Fisler parcel. If the parcel is subdivided in the future, property owner (Fisler or owner of record) will reimburse the City for the cost of cul-de-sac improvements.