CC Min 1995-03-13 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

City Engineer Luck presented the staff report and explained that construction of the Jefferson A venue Underpass, fully approved by the County and CCAG, and fully funded, will require the acquisition of two parcels, 1015 Jefferson (now vacant) and 1007 (or 1001) Jefferson. City Engineer Luck advised that the grade separation was approved for pedestrian, vehicular and train safety reasons. City Engineer Luck used overheads to show the grade separation, and how, upon completion, not only will there be no access to the subject properties, but much of each property will be incorporated into the grade separation project for landscaping, utility easements and the retaining wall. City Engineer Luck advised that establishing "needs and necessity" to take property, and especially in this case, the very successful business at 1001 Jefferson, is never taken lightly, and every attempt is being made to negotiate with the owners to provide full fair market value in cash, and relocation assistance. City Engineer Luck added that although eminent domain proceedings are ongoing, if or when either property owner settles with the City on a fair market price, all eminent domain proceedings will stop immediately. City Engineer Luck described the necessary clean-up required and state and county regulations, and the responsibilities of neighboring parcels,. City Engineer Luck explained that the owners (Vanhams) of the 1015 Jefferson property have already begun the clean-up of contaminants on their property and needed to test on the 1007 site, but the owners of 1007 would not permit the Vanhams nor City staff to do the necessary testing to see if contamination had migrated. Therefore, an appraisal for a fair market value could not be completed, as remediation costs will be subtracted from the final valuation. City Engineer Luck advised that the City would be looking to the state for financial assistance to do the clean-up related to the Jefferson grade separation, and would try to assist both of these subject properties, and provided the time lines for construction ofthe project. City Attorney Schricker summarized the legal framework for consideration of eminent domain proceedings and what were and what were not germane to the resolutions before the Council at this time. The owners have already been apprised of the City's opinion of the fair market price, but that amount is not relevant nor germane to the decision of the Council at this point. The acquisition price is complicated somewhat by the fact that the cost of remediation necessarily must be offset against the valuation. The City does not know at this time what those costs will be. Negotiations will continue irrespective of the eminent domain action. The resolutions to be adopted tonight are the first formal steps by the Council relative to these eminent domain proceedings. The actual first formal step was the offer made to the owners according to the Government Code referred to in the resolution. The owners know the value that has been placed on their property by the public agency before they come before you on a Hearing of Necessity. City Attorney Schricker described the Necessity Hearing being held and the resolutions on the agenda which are required by law before the agency can go to court and initiate eminent domain proceedings. The sole purpose of the Hearing is to determine the elements of public necessity which are 1) the public interest and necessity require the proposed project, the underlying requirements being public safety and congestion; 2) the proposed project is planned and located in the manner that most compatible with the Regular Meeting Minutes MINUTE BOOK NO. 53 March 13, 1995 Page No. 101 Page 10 --,...- -.