Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - January 5, 1983 (31)1 ., 7 9 CITY OF LODI PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TO: City Council FROM: City Manager DATE: December 30, 1982 COUNCIL COMMUNICATION SUBJECT: Turner Road Right -of -Way Acquisition, Snell RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council review the attached right-of-way agreement etween Carl E. and Janice A. Snell, and the City of Lodi, for the acquisition of right-of-way for the widening of Turner Road immediately west of Cluff Avenue, and take appropriate action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Public Works Department was directed by the City Council to acquire necessary right-of-way for the ultimate widening of Turner Road. Involved in that widening is the parcel of land shown in yellow on the attached sketch. Craig Hubbard of Stockton appraised the parcel at $29,500. Included in that appraisal were certain coats i!i addition to the land, such at payment for a garage, installation of a fence, some remodeling and other items. The owner of the property was contacted by Mr. Ferguson, our part-time right-of-way agent, and later both Mr. Ferguson and I met with the owners of the property onsite to discuss the ultimate location of street facilities. Out of this discussion and further contact by Mr. Ferguson with the owners, came the attached right-of-way agreement. During the discussions, the Grantors felt a masonry fence rather than a wood fence would be necessary along the Turner Road frontage because of street noise, and in discussing this item with our appraiser, he felt that it was a reasonable request, and the appraisal was increased sufficie,,tly to allow the construction of a masonry wall in lieu of the wood fence. In addition, the owners asked for three items described in Paragraph 3 a, b b c of the agreement. In reverse order, Item 'c' requests that the City not requ#re the Grantor to connect to public sewer and wbter facilities as long as the property is owned and used as a single-family dwelling by the present owners. There is perhaps some precedent in agreeing to this; however, it should be pointed out that the exception does have a limited time and, to date, the City has not enforced portions of the City Code which require connection to City sewer under specific circumstances. Item 'b', an 18" encroachment of a fence in the portion of the City's right-of-way, is reasonable in this case in order to adequately clear the front of their porch with any fence or wall they construct. It will leave 12" between APPROVED: FILE N0. N N y A. CLAVES. City Manager City Council December 30, 19806 Page 2 the wall and the ultimate sidewalk, and we would installation of street light conduit, a sign, or might be necessary. The encroachment is shown on or expect this to be adequete for anything of that nature which the attached sketch. Item 'a' asks that the City be responsible for the installation of curb, gutter and sidewalk and all street paving, with the work being done when the City deems necessary. We do not have a policy regarding the installation of curb, gutter and sidewalk when the City acquires right-of-way. However, it can be viewed as part of the cost of the land, and as such, might not be precedent -setting. Our appraiser indicated that most cities he has , irked with install curb, gutter and sidewalk without cost to the owner when - ring rights-of-way. The cost of curb, gutter and sidewalk across the Sneii's ultimate frontage is estimated at $3,500 and the cost of paving at $11,500. The Public Works Department would recommend agreement be acceptable and Item 'a' without ck L. Ronsko ublic Works Director Attachment JLR:GER:dmw that Items 'b' and 'c' of the recommendation. Auqust 13, 1982 Clarification of Turner Road Rights -of -Way Acquisition and Construction Between Beckman Roast and Cluff Avenue DAC ;D liiFUltATION: In January of this year. the City Council rscelved a copy of the attached letter dated January 14, 1982, from Morris 9 Weneil Architects requesting that the City purchase the right-of=way fronting the Jerome and Snell parcels.in order that Turner Road could be constructed to its full t+isth t,, accommodate the anticlpated traffic„from the rproposed Cal Cushion Dayalapnent within the Callow Oaks industrial "Park, The Council then nave staff direction to obtain appraisals on the Jerome and Snail. parcels, At the followlnq Council meeting, the attached memo of March 5, 1982, was reviewed with the City Council. The Council indicated that the questloas wtthin.this Memo would be Answered upon obtaining the appraisals .for Ithe Snell anti Jurnt�e properties. The Cortn411 b►s niv 31reetcd staff to proceed on the acquisition sof the Jerorw prepurty anal the Snot I appraisal. Thorufnrc, the following quoit Ions ,y frog,, ttu. Aarch > ranee s.ti`il need elarificaticui: t'' _- 1. Since.01 Cushion is apparently not going to develop within the Iii l l'n,+ Oaks Subd ivi slon, does this change any previous Council pnsitions? 2. 1. It. t14+e CntrncII'!% intention to alio acquire the Turner'oRciad riq,lht%-of-way frontinrr the Anannos rrnperty? 1. ''ince: the right-of-wny Is obtained, is it the City's intent to fray for any of the widening of Turner Road?' the estir.sated righr-nf-way acquisition costs and construction c.c.sts am shown below: =;> Total R/W Costs Construction Cost Total $50,000 to $130.000 $53.000 $103.060to $213,W, Based on the attached letter from the City Attorney dated January 21, 1932, the Willow Oaks industrial Park developer apparently Indicated tai the City Attorney that they (tlillow Oaks,'Industrial• Park) would pay for the street Inprovements fronting the.;Snall and Jerome propertids if the City purchased the right-of-way. City Council Augvs t 11. 1982 Page 2 i 4. If Turnor Road Is to be widened st City Lost, is the widen - Ing to take place in front of Jerome. Snell and Anagnos properties? S. If widening Is to take place, is It the Council's Intent to construct all of the street improve0amts including parking lane. curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lights. or only those improvements necessary to provide the ultimate for travel lane? 6. If it is the Council's intent for the City to be responsiiule for widening, does the Coencii want to consider reimbursement at the time the properties develop or convert to a higher use? 7. Does the Counc'' hive any preferonce on what City funds should A used for the right-of-way acquisition and any Turner (toad widening? Jack L. Ronyko Public Works Director At t at hr•;,, t s JLR/seh f MORRIS & W L 301 west Locust Sheet Lodi, California 95240 Phone(209)369-8258 January 14, 1982 Mr. Jack Ronsko CITY OF LODI 221 West Pine Street Lodi, California 95240 Dear Mr. Ronsko: chnt -"p and planners, inc. As architects for the Willow Oaks Industrial Park and Cal -Cushion Inc., we are formally requesting the public condemnation of Assessor Parcel Nos. 049-020-02 and 049-020-16, owners Snell and Jerome respectively. We also ask that this request be placed upon the next City Council agenda for review and action. Cal -Cushion Inc. of Lodi is proposing a new facility that will ac- commodate 300-400 employees. This high employment, along with trucks from Sanitary City Disposal and other area industries, will genezate a considerable amount of traffic at the intersections of Turakir and Cluff Roads. Therefore, it is our professional opinion that in the best interest of the City of Lodi and the two property owners, the City condemn this property so Turner Road may be constructed to its full design width at this point. Please find enclosed a parcel map indicating this requested con - damnation. If you need any additional information, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, MORRIS i WENELL chitects and Planners Inc. Robert Morris, Architect President RMsrf Enclosure roben p. mems • larry wenn RECEIVED JAN 18 135 CITY OF LODI PL existing residences and gutter case do lodl ern �\ oe C� willow oaks golf course 1 Q � J -- - �--� ser:►tart city MEMORANDUM, City of Lodl, Public Works Department TO: City Council FROM: Public dirks Director DATE: March 5, 1982 SUBJECT: Clarification of Staff Direction to Cor. uet Turner Road fat Cluff Avenue) to its Ultimate Width The exact notion. moved by Pinkerton and seconded by Murphy, Is as followst "That we try to acquire the property so we can continue the streets and tie It Into the existing contract and get it done at a reasonable price so it's done, out of the way, and so we have a devaiopaiant with an $caws to the Industrial area of the City of Lodi." Because of the exact wording of the motion, we, the staff, feel that clart- f 1 cat lon Is needed on the following Item: 1. Is It the Council's Intention to acquire the required rights-of-way from Snel i , Jerome, and Anagnos? For Council's informtlon, It has been past practice of the City Council to use their condemnation power where portions of future street al igim m-ts were needed as pert of a proposed development for Installation of utilities, additional street width, drainage, etc. However, It has been In the past, the developer's responsi- blilty ti pay .for the appralml , condemnation, and any 110getton costs, the right-of-way needs cftd to make the necessary Installatlotns required for his developmsant. ; For Council Information, the appraisal work will cost $3,000 and the rights-ef-+ay costs and preliminary construction estimates are as follows: Right-cf-Way Costs* Jeromwm $ 70 Sneil 59500 Anagnos 10 110 TOTAL $17,000 *Based on $0.50 per square foot. Constr•,:tlon Costs Total $ 89000 $ $9700 119000 169500 '1&000 442800 $33,000 $70000 No value given to severance. 2. Is It the Intent that the City pay all of the above costs? This Is questioned based on the memo that was In the last Council packet from City Attorney Stein. From this mann It appears the t City Council March 5. 1982 Page 2 developer has indicated to the City Attorney that they would !oe wi_i_1Ing to pay for the improveients-in front of Snell and Jerome properties if the City purchased the rights-of-way. 3. Is it the City Council's intent to construct all of the street Improvements, including parking lane, curb,gukter and sidewalk, or only those improvements necessary to provide the ultialate four 0) travel lanes? k. It was clear that the Council wanted this work done in conjunction and together with the work under the Assessment District. Since the Assessment District contract has been let 'and it is the con- tractor's intent to Install the underground utlllties and do the roadway construction on Turner Road first. it doesn't appear that we will be able to do the additional work on Turner Road to con- junction with the Assesswait District contract. It is *soused that Oe Council doesn't went to delay the District work. s. If it is the Council's Intent for the City to be responsible for the construction costs,, does the Council want to consider reliabursamm: at the time the properties develop and convert to a higher use? 6. It It is the Couch's intent for the City to pay for the right-of-way and the additional street constructiont does the Council have any preference on what City funds should be used? i. if Cal -Cushion does not develop (the City has no guarantee) is It stili the Council's intent to widen Turner Road? Jack L. Ronsko Public Works arrector JLR/eeh CARL 1:. SNELL and JANICE A. SKLL, his wife, as J01nt tenants A portion of the Northeast Quarter (ME 1/4) of the Northwest Quarter (IMI 1/4) of Section six (6), TownshlP throe (3) Ibrth, Range seven (7) East. Mount Dlablo Base and Meridlon, according to the Official Plat thereof. and more porticulariy described as fol tows t COIMMING at the Northeast cornor of the Northwest Quarter (MW 1/4) of said Settler six (6); thence Southerly along the fast line of said MortMost darter (IM 1/4) 100 feet; theme Westerly parallel to the Borth line of the Northeest Ome• (N11 IA) of said Section six (6), ISO foot to the Nortfumst corner of the property drssrlbed in Dred to Luella J. Jerome, recorded February 16, 1968 in Deet of Official Macords. Vol. 3167, page 169, San Joaquin County Smordel thew Southerly along the Westerly line of said Jar e• property, 110 tett to the TOM POINT OF OWNING; thence Southerly along said Westerly line 10 fret to the Southwest corner of sold Jerome property; thanca Easterly along the Southerly line of said Jaroone property i50 feet to the Quarter Section iIne; thence Southerly along the said Quarter Section tine, a dlstanc+e of 30 feet to the Southeast coneer of the property described In deed tW Sawuel Millar, at up., fe"rdad Osoerier 24. 1927 In look "A" of Rede. Vol. !A. pop :57. Sen daealutn Ooewty ilseards; thence Westerly ale" the South line of Miller property. S23 feet= themos Northerly parallel with the wt line of said Northwest % arter (iRI 1/6) of Seatlan six (6). 40 feet= thence tasterly and parellei t+ith the North line of the Northwest 4derter (NY 1/4) 175 feet to the TWA 1'01Nt of UGINNINS. 0 U3. al