Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVacation of Lake Street Right-of-way Adjacent to Huntington REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION June 15, 1992 Date - Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Admi ' for / Prepared by: Louis F. Sandoval, Director of Public Works Subject: VACATION ON LAKE STREET Consistent with Council Policy? [X] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception �j 9 Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments: ,1 with STATEMENT OF ISSUE: An adjacent property owner is requesting the vacation of an easement for street purposes over a portion of old Lake Street, south of Pecan Avenue. RECOMMENDATION• Adopt the attached resolution of intent to vacate said easement and schedule the required public hearing for July 6, 1992. ANALYSIS: The easement for public street purposes over a portion of old Lake Street, south of Pecan Avenue, is unneeded. The street has been re-routed and this segment was unused. It could be vacated and returned to the owner in fee. This action would relieve the public of liability and restore the property to the tax roles. On August 19, 1991, the City Council overruled a decision of the Planning Commission and found the vacation of this parcel to be in conformance with the City's General Plan. A Public Works staff review has determined that this parcel is of no further value to the department for general street purposes. FUNDING SOURCE: None. No funds necessary. ALTERNATIVE ACTION• Deny the request without a public hearing. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution of Intent to Vacate Map 3252g/1 P10 5/85 RESOLUTION NO. 393 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH PROVIDING NOTICE OF INTENTION TO VACATE AN EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC STREET PURPOSES OVER A PORTION OF OLD LAKE STREET SOUTH OF PECAN AVENUE WHEREAS, the City of Huntington Beach owns an easement for public street and right of way purposes over the real property generally described as a portion of old Lake Street south of Pecan Avenue in the City of Huntington Beach; and The City Council proposes to vacate said easement; and On August 19, 1991, a public meeting was held before the City Council, at which time it was determined, pursuant to California Government Code Section 65402, that the proposed vacation of the easement described herein conformed to the City' s General Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby resolve as follows : 1. Pursuant to Division 9, Part 3, Chapter 2 of the California Streets and Highways Code, commencing with Section 8320, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach hereby declares its intention to vacate an easement over a portion of old Lake Street, south of Pecan Avenue more particularly described as follows: AFJk 5/92222 -1- Beginning at the most westerly corner of Tract 12268 as shown on a map recorded in Book 593, Pages 27, 28, and 29 inclusive, of Miscellaneous Maps, Records of Orange County; thence north 40037 ' 17" east 162 . 57 feet to a point; thence south 49022 '43" east 9 .39 feet to the True Point of Beginning: Thence continuing south 49022 '43" east 59 . 95 feet to a point on a line, said line being the old center line of Lake Street; thence north 0044 ' 02" west along said line 196 . 59 feet to a point bears north 63007105" west, said curve being concave northwesterly and having a radius of 395 .00 feet; thence southerly and westerly along said curve through a central angle of 11050 ' 12" , an arc distance of 81. 60 feet to a point on a non- tangent line, a bearing through said point bears 51016 ' 53" west; thence south 0044 ' 02" east 89 . 08 feet to the True Point of Beginning . . The city hereby reserves and excepts a permanent easement and right at any time or from time to time, to construct, maintain, operate, replace, remove and renew storm drains, sanitary sewers, water mains and appurtenant structures in, AFJk 5/92222 -2- upon, over and across that portion of old Lake Street containing for public street purposes the easement proposed to be vacated, and pursuant to any existing franchises or renewals thereof, or otherwise to construct, maintain, operate, replace, remove, renew and enlarge lines of pipe, conduits, cables, wires, poles and other convenient structures, equipment and fixtures for the operation of gas pipelines, telegraphic and telephone lines, railroad lines, and for the transportation or distribution of electric energy, petroleum and its products, ammonia, water, and incidental purposes, including access and the right to keep the property free from flammable materials, and wood growth, and otherwise protect the same from all hazards in, upon and over the easement for public street purposes proposed to be vacated on a portion of old Lake Street . 2 . The City Clerk is directed to maintain on file in the office of the City Clerk maps or plans showing the particulars of the proposed vacation, and reference is hereby made to such maps and plans for particulars as to said proposed vacation. 3 . The City Council does hereby fix July 6, 1992, at the hour of 7: 00 p.m. , or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard in Council Chambers in the Civic Center, as the time and place for hearing all persons interested in or objecting to the proposed vacation, which time is not less than fifteen (15) days from the passage of this resolution. 4 . The City Clerk is directed to cause a copy of this resolution to be published in a weekly newspaper, published and AFJk 5/92222 -3- circulated in Huntington Beach for at least two successive weeks prior to the time set herein for the public hearing . 5 . The Director of Public Works is directed to post, or cause to be posted, notices of vacation conspiculously along the easement proposed to be vacated at least two weeks before the date of the hearing. The notices shall be posted no more than 300 feet apart, but at least three notices shall be posted. The notices shall state the day, hour, and place of the hearing, and shall refer to the adoption of this resolution of intention, and shall include a map or plan showing the location of the portion of the easement proposed to be vacated. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of , 1992 . Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Clerk City Attorney /,-sr �Z E AND APPRO NITIATED A V iyAdmiisator n Directo of Public Works AFJk 5/92222 -4- SEE SPEC/AL PAGE 24-209 FOR SUBSURFACE FEE TITLE ASSESSMENT 22 I L 26 I I 24-20 HUNTINGTON STREET e Q / Go I GO SOq 22�'J•n "t /?7.50' 0 42r I,,' Z7- ii II II Z I I I J IQ5r' S�• "_.5 r) �J�. I J i[y2 / EL J, V/ TA� Zt 24 2 4 ; 2 1�20 I 5 I rlI j�® (4) 23 ' 4 /9 II YI I Q II 1I 1 Q Z? I 1 1 1 Ii zr /tZ.JO' 77 I 10 b B 6 5 %I OI 9 BI 7 6 5 4 3 /5 /B z 6 /7 zz 50' /n so' h /s / a•. -- - h 24 // .J 32 v nn e a 6 // 32 _^ 3 7 ./6 ` / s' % 23 'w-iV--- - .�. / 3/ /3 30. y %3 30, " e rrs' .h/4 29,•- 29 < /rz. o• -// - /2 a /25' - /5 2B /6 27 6/ S 19/zso 27- S` -- F1 h--- 7 "_ 6 27 . 13 J 34 h e - - . .^ - /7 26 -& 4 n - /7 6 17 "26 . 12 .zs ti I �ii 24 33 /n so' - /B 25, '©-- b W r /B 25 ,�. /rz ss• - / s- p•////// 7/� �\ /B 25 /rz w. k ' n - nr' /9., 24 /9 -24 26 3/ rrJ'' 8 n Q n ss./r .13 W_ zr r:z o• ~ ° 20 2362/ 26 'z52 31 __ Q e Try o 2/ -22 - Q „ --22 � _ Cv22 go 5 .-2.' -�'29 /27.50' LO' /t�Je' - /I).Jo• LOB /rZ.lo- J LO' 67J0' LO . •f0' - ..��•�-, ALABAMA` STREET - b- u r _ se. o• L.K 60" as es' sq' zi rs' J ' rP' r zs v• I s zt zs• cs s Q �� K.. 3ql I I , 1 •,,, I I e = h I Nis I I , y W � j 2b 311 32 i I 3Y+ 35 = v(I) ® 14 15 14) ®- 6 24 25 b i 27 26 LI 21' 20 23 22 17 I -- I I ' 60 Bzs , RACT TT1zS /1/ 2�/ - n0 =aC.,/, 2 4 5I 6 7! BI 7 6 5I 4 3I / /71 /6 /51 /4 /3 /Z /O B 71 6 5 4 3 / /O 7. 6 5 4 3 2/ = TRACTCD �Ocn 9; ni (n PROJECT 939-50-236-394 - - P� z x CD m. Q - mO�Nrmn mO� V LOT e3 LT" o CD C, 4.673 AC. Z �/ s, c O- �. o_ � c Z Wm,7 .T� p? s/• - /I�JOL�OTA mOc�� „B3 . -207 308AC Q :I.cli- v�ao� 12268' m Or'-12Z 5" - 87 O pamvJ� $ LAKE STREET do `�' No �mnrmzm 16 E O b3 to 13 O o �9r NOTE-ASSESSOR'S BLOCK d ASSESSOR'S MAC MARCH /948 REDBURN TRACT M.M.4-/ sue. F _ VISTA DEL MAR TRACT M.M4-5,6 PARCEL NUMBERS BOOK 24 PAGE20 q� 1 z P SHOWN IN CIRCLES COUNTY OF ORANGE TRACT NO. 12268 M.M.593-27,28,29 6' ° ;- p� 4) JEROME M. BAME ATTORNEY AT LAW 10055 SLATER AVENUE, SUITE 250 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 TELEPHONE (714) 960-4329 FAX (714) 965-7816 June 1 , 1992 z oc 4 Honorable Mayor Jim Silva OM -. rT'o r and City Council X7 rn4 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH a 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Re: Agenda Item No. 7 On City Council Agenda of June 15, 1992 Subject: Abandonment of Right-of-Way Over Old Lake Street Adjacent to Huntington Bayshore Condominium Project Dear Honorable Mayor Silva and City Council: This office represents the Homeowners' Association of the Huntington Bayshore Condominium project located at 200 Lake Street in Huntington Beach. This letter is written to you in connection with the proposal to vacate the west side of the old Lake Street right-of-way adjacent to the Huntington Bayshore Condominium project. The east side of the old Lake Street right- of-way was previously vacated to benefit the Huntington Bayshore Condominium project. The adjoining landowner, Mr. Niccole, has apparently requested that the remaining west side of the old Lake Street be vacated to benefit his (Mr. Niccole's) parcel. PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT THE HUNTINGTON BAYSHORE CONDOMINIUM OWNERS'ASSOCIATION STRONGLY OPPOSES THE VACATION OF THE WEST SIDE OF THE OLD LAKE STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THE ADJOINING LANDOWNER, MR. NICCOLE, OR TO BENEFIT HIS (MR. NICCOLE'S) PARCEL. This remaining right-of-way strip (which, for convenience, will be referred to herein as the "subject right-of-way") is currently being used i Honorable Mayor Jim Silva and City Council 2 June 1 , 1992 by, and is of great importance to, the Huntington Bayshore Condominium project. This subject right-of-way is frequently utilized by Moving Companies when owners/occupants of the Huntington Bayshore Condominiums move in or out of the project, by the Gardening and Maintenance Company when they perform gardening and maintenance services to the project, by Utility Companies when utilities must be installed or repaired in the project, etc., etc. It is absolutely essential that the owners and occupants of the Huntington Bayshore Condominium project continue to have the benefit of the use of this subject right-of-way. The Owners' Association fears that the City Council's abandonment of the subject right-of-way to the adjoining landowner will preclude the owners and occupants of the Huntington Bayshore Condominiums from the continued essential use of this subject right-of-way. Therefore, please be mindful of our client's strong opposition to the proposed abandonment of this subject right-of-way when this matter is considered by the City Council. Most respectfully, JEROME M. BAME Attorney for Huntington Bayshore Condominium Owners' Association JMB:mgw c: H.B. City Clerk dCITV OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator FROM: Gail Hutton, City Attorney DATE: April 30, 1992 SUBJECT: Vacation of Lake Street Right of Way Adjacent to Huntington Bayshore Project RLS 92-178 BACKGROUND You have requested an opinion regarding the proposed vacation of the west side of the Lake Street right of way adjacent to the Huntington Bayshore Condominium project. The east side of Lake Street was previously vacated to benefit Bayshore. The adjoining landowner, Mr. Niccole, has requested that the remaining west side of Lake Street be vacated to benefit his parcel. ISSUES May the city vacate the property? What is the legal effect of the vacation on the Bayshore development? CONCLUSION The city may vacate the property. The vacation has no new legal ramifications as to the Bayshore property. DISCUSSION The vacation of public streets is governed by Streets and Highways Code Section 8300, et seq. Public easements in vacated streets are extinguished, unless preserved under Streets and Highways Code Section 8340, et seq. So long as the city follows the statutory .procedure, it may vacate its easement for public right of way. According to a recent analysis performed by Planning Staff (copy attached, the portion of Lake Street at issue was calculated as part of the required open space for the Bayshore project. The adjoining parcel, at the corner of Lake and Orange, was not included as part of the required open space area. Michael Uberuaga, City Administrator April 30, 1992 Page 2 Regardless of whether the easement is vacated, the Bayshore project is not in compliance because the original open space calculation wrongly included the area at issue. Thus, the entitlement was incorrectly premised, and the project has always been in violation of the .city's open space requirements. The city may address' this .violation by initiating code enforcement proceedings, or receiving an application for a variance. Therefore, the vacation of the easement has no new legal ramifications regarding the Bayshore project, and should properly be treated as an entirely separate issue. RECOMMENDATION The city should proceed with the proposed vacation if it is in accord with established policy guidelines regarding such matters. A separate decision should be made regarding whether or not to pursue code compliance on the Bayshore project' s lack of required open ce. all L-1,7 ail Hutton City Attorney cc: Scott Hess, Sr. Planner Sarah Lazarus, Deputy City Attorney Jerry Bame, Esq. 125: 5/l/92 : sg CITY OF HUNTINGTON "BEACH INTER-OFFICE MEMO TO: Paul D'A1-essandro, Deputy City Attorney FROM: Scott Hess, Senior Planney006A_ SUBJECT: Huntington Bayshore DATE: April 27, 1992 Per your request, the density and open space calculations for the Huntington Bayshore development(Tract No. 12268/SPA No. 87-15) have been reviewed: Attached is a map .which depicts the parcels included for :these calculations. As you will notice, the project boundaries did include the corner parcel at Lake St. and Orange Ave. The 159 unit condominium project is unique because it spans two different zones: Oldtown -Specific Plan, District 2 and Downtown Specific Plan, District 6. One side note, the project did include a density bonus. Following are the site area numbers based upon SPA No. 87-15: -VI�a NIo..Jed Gross nits Units Acres (Zoning) (General Plan) Oldtown Specific Plan Area: 6.13 133.5 91.95 Downtown Specific Plan: , 1.27 31.75 31.75 Density Bonus: 0 35.3 Total : 7.4 165.25 159.0 According to the open space calculation plan, the corner parcel at Lake and Orange was not included as part of the required open space area. However, the entire Lake St. right-of-way was calculated as open space. Should you have any questions, please give me a call . CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 5 ca -M INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Paul D'Alessandro Deputy City Attorney FROM: Scott Hess Senior Planner SUBJECT: VACATION OF LAKE STREET ROW ADJACENT TO HUNTINGTON BAYSHORE PROJECT (RLS 92-178) DATE: May 20, 1992 It should be noted that the vacation of Lake Street would also affect the density for the Bayshore project. The Lake Street ROW as well as the corner parcel at Lake Street and Orange Avenue were included in the Bayshore Master Development Plan approved by the Planning Commission and used for determining density of the project. Any relinquishing of this property which was included in the master plan, would result in a density increase for the Bayshore project. Such an increase would make the project non-conforming with the existing zoning and General Plan for the property. I hope this further clarifies my memo dated April 27, 1992. . cc: Gail Hutton, City Attorney Mike Adams, Community Development Director . SH: lp (3415d) _-.^ •� ♦ n� wNarORr ram- ^ , OLD T N ; 'ISPECIFIC A (QISTRI E I �. ►nRw � bi f�ti A � . R2-PDCZ a 012•PD-C2Lo r R2-PO-Cz t C. �`T,P�,n� � \ t •• � -[' - ;I R2-PD-Ci� •R2-PD-CZ •=-) O ., ,r �.,� ' :y R2-PD-CZ i , •n, •� � ��,t�'`'�• `.� � MH-CZ f .�'� _. R2-Po-ci• • TOWN .,c FIC i`ew,I �.m.r ro t lti:...�i.r:�'— •.:ti�'! �NP'f�ICT R 80 R2-PD-CZ m �O•�V ` t� -O.,o ,�c i i sae R2-PD-CZ i i R2-PD-CZ" /CT -,Iflv \ ,� R2-PD CZ R2-PD CZ•) rwt .rpr '�' .•R2-PD-CZ <^t!.F!e4e -0 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN-0 DIST NCT•Fib CPPBG-30 - J \\, MUNTINGTCM!BEACH v� HIINTINGTON REACH PLANNING DIVISION JUN 11 ' 92 11 : 33 NEWCOMB DEVELOPMENT PAGE . 02 JA ` City of Huntington Bead i� 24 5%.MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH REOEVEt.OPMENT AGENCY OFFICE OF THE WCUTNE DIRECTOR o neoomber 28, 1989 I� Naw�aomb Developoner►t 2900 lafayette Avenue Report Beach, Ck 92663 Attentions .7ohn T. Newcxvb Mject: Baysbme - Tract 12268 Off.-site publicyt re' Dear Jahn: Appeazs as if wa have t1mlly reached a .bottam line regaxding reimbur=*= of public imrwawnt costs due you per ttarms outlined in the Owner Futioipa►tion Agreement bob-oam your fI,= (N/R Mmtirgtron Partners) and the fluntingt= Beadh ►elcpuent Agency. I have spaksn with Grab Franz, LxWty City Afninistrator, reganVi g this iswie and the clearest way to proceed ,in that, per terms of the above mentioned Owner Participation on Agreement, amount awed you aryl arou t" you are obligated gated to f mid for future land acquisition- (Parcel 2, Section 201 Page 3) dire appraKimtely egual. We have therefore concluded that in.lieu of trading checks, you will not be raquired to post the land acquivition amount of $400,000 and in turn the Redevelcpm nt Agerny will not be reimbursing you $400,000 of the $402,669.19 balance of public inprove ment aosts eligible for su qh reimbursement. The bala ($2,689.19) will be credited towards the iuprovement and c0.ean--up band (Section 201, Page 5) to be pcxgted per term of the max--� owner Participation Agreement. 06/11Z92 11:50 TY213 661 149 JU14 11 ' 9,e 11 . 33 NEWCOMER DEUELOPMENT PAGE . 03 Jotu•1. Newcctrb Dioemi3ear 28, 1989 page 2 Dalow.-for your review axe' figures on which the reiudxusel mts are based, thwsa were w44,1ied by uur PUaYia wor)w Dot. These nunbam W"S oalot4atAd after reviewing invoices sutrdtted by your office. 1. Approved off-site public ipravaaWto Cwts $1,043,631.24 2. Oxtsaotar fee (per Uww of 0M) .10% 104,363.12 3. Eligible for 1 1 14 7 1 993.36 4. Previausly r>einUwsed for public storm drain H 445,305.17 S. Balance 702,609.19 6. Am int N/R Part- ors abligated per OPA (-) 300,000.00 7. Total eligible refmbt zoomt $402,689.19 One item rmmxIiM attention before a final certificatm or cxAVllmwee can be iSsued is the on--site ear..nt and clean-W bCaid ralating to parcal. 2. In year letter of Nov r. -i 7, 3.009 a figutc+f+ of $20,000 is referervaed. Hum we reoeived an estimate and agreed on that runbetr (7) . Again, aoo6rpt my spology for the time it has taken to omalude this maths. ZlieH�dzing er�x & Red vel.cp rent CPS tkjl xc: Eiob Franz, Administration Bill Pattopoff, Public works 0044h CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Honorable Jim Silva, Mayor, and Members of the City Council FROM: Gail .Hutton, City Attorney DATE: June 24, 1992 SUBJECT: Lake Street Vacation After further discussion of the issue of vacating a portion of the Lake Street easement in favor of the Niccole property with Redevelopment Agency counsel Tom Clark, we have concluded that it is unwise for the city to vacate the portion of Lake Street as proposed, for the following reasons: 1. The city is required to use "best efforts" to acquire the Niccole parcel under the terms of the Bayshore O.P.A. Vacation of the right of way may be construed by a court as bad faith in reference to this obligation. 2. Vacation of the right of way will result in the surface rights reverting to Mr. Niccole or a subsequent owner of his parcel and increase the cost to the Agency for acquisition of that parcel. 3 . Emergency vehicle access to the area will be impaired. RECOMMENDATION Do not approve the proposed vacation. �N Gail Hutton City Attorney cc: Michael Uberuaga, City Administrator