Agenda Section Other Business
Agenda Item #
Report # 97-
Staff Report
Council Meeting Date:
REPORT PREPARED BY
: SAMANTHA ORDUNO, CITY MANAGERSIGNATURE:___________________________________
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
CONSIDERATION OF MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF CARPINTERIA AND THE SILVER SANDS MOBILEHOME PARK ASSOCIATIONS
I. Background:
Over the past three years, the residents of Silver Sands Mobile Home Park have been working toward the purchase of their Park from the current owner. City staff assisted the Association by facilitating several meetings between various Park residents and members of the Association as well as meetings between representatives of the owner and members of the Association.
One of the issues that had to be resolved before the Association could complete the purchase of the Park was the vacation of City streets that had been platted in the original subdivision of the property, but are not in use as City streets. Please refer to Exhibit A which indicates the legal map of the area. The City streets indicated on the map are not, in fact, currently used as City streets, but are locations for several manufactured home sites. This has been the case for several years.
Both the Association and former City staff had believed that the City owned the streets (Dorrance, Third Street and Cypress) in fee. The City’s expectation in all negotiations with the Association was that the City was to be compensated for vacating the streets in question. Several dollar amounts were discussed, but a firm number was never determined because additional research was required to determine the exact process that brought the Park into being and the City’s role after incorporation.
Research by the Association’s attorney, David Fainer, and verified by the City’s attorney, Peter Brown, has revealed that the City does not own the street properties in fee, but instead has control of the property through easements. It is the Association’s contention that the City has illegally "taken" 35 feet of the Third Street easement for purposes (Salt Marsh Restoration) not allowed by law. The City’s position, verified by the City attorney, is that the restoration project is consistent with street easement uses. The Park further contends that the City, by using the 35 feet of the Third Street easement for the Salt Marsh project has denied them historical use of the property for the purposes of guest and additional resident parking.
It must be noted that the Association’s contentions regarding the City’s use of the Third Street easement, is made without malice or threat of any action other than a desire to resolve the situation to everyone’s benefit. They have merely pointed out what they believe to be a legal position that may or may not be supported by the courts. There is case law to support both sides of this issue.
In meetings last week with the Association Board members, City staff and attorneys for both positions, all worked toward the following goals:
The Park is in need of major repairs to its infrastructure. The Association plans to make substantial financial investments that will dramatically improve the aesthetics and functionalism of the Park thereby improving the value and quality of the Park while, at the same time, maintaining its affordability for senior citizens and families.
While the City may not own the streets in fee, there is value in easements and the City, could reclaim the
property for street purposes. This action was viewed by City staff as undesirable.
3. Resolution of the Third Street easement use
The Salt Marsh Restoration project has begun, utilizing 35 feet of the Third Street easement for a trail, berm and fence. While the City maintains its position that these uses are consistent with the law, a formal, legal determination would be costly, time consuming and could result in disruption of a completed multi-faceted and multi-agency public use project.
Correspondence from the Association’s attorney (Exhibit C) had offered a resolution to the issues that involved reciprocal quit claims and an undetermined amount of compensation to the park for the perceived added value of property owned in fee as opposed to property held only by easements. This was not acceptable to City staff and discussions continued resulting in a tentative agreement by the Association to the City’s following proposal:
The City will vacate and quit claim the Dorrance and Cypress Street easements in exchange for the Association’s quit claim of Third street and their agreement to make improvements to Ash Ave that would provide upgraded parking area for pubic use – estimated cost $50,000.
The benefits of this proposal are:
The attached MOU has been prepared for Council consideration and outlines the proposed agreement. The City is still obligated to follow the legal process to vacate the street easements and the Association must still obtain the current property owner’s agreement to the proposal before transactions can be finalized.
II. Critical Issues:
The City’s position has always been that it can not make a "gift" of City property (either by fee ownership or right-of-way- rights) and that compensation for vacation would have to be part of a settlement. There have been suggestions that the compensation would be in the form of a cash settlement with the funds being used to purchase property for park and/or recreational areas in the community. This proposed MOU addresses only compensation directly linked to street improvements adjacent to the Marsh.
It was staff’s position that the suggested improvements on Ash Avenue would contribute, in some measure, to the need for parking on Ash to accommodate visitors to the Marsh as well as for boat/jetski/boat launchers and beach users. This MOU is before you for consideration, but does not represent the only compensation alternative. Should the Council desire a different outcome, staff is prepared to readdress the issue with the representatives of the Association.
The proposed improvements to Ash Avenue are suggested as a means of completing the overall project area for the Marsh project and the street improvements to the southern portion of Ash where the bathroom and storage facility will be located. Curb and gutter, removal of the drainage ditch, paving, stripping and improved signage will all contribute to the overall aesthetics of the Ash Avenue area. It must be noted that the improvements suggested to be funded by the Association will also benefit the Park residents and their visitors.
The City is legally obligated to pursue the appropriate process to formally vacate street easements. While there is a cost to this process, it is minor. However, it would seem financially prudent to require that the costs be shared between the City and the Association.
Before the Association can close escrow on the property, the issue of the street easements must be resolved and approved by the current owner.
It has been staff’s approach that there were no immediate and/or future anticipated uses for these easements. However, the future uses of these easements is an issue that should be discussed if the Council should determine that a future use would be best served by keeping the easements in place.
III. Impact / Implications:
A. Policy:
Vacating street easements is a historical practice and has been done in the past by the City. Receiving compensation for such vacation also is consistent with past practices.
B. Financial:
The estimated costs for the suggested improvements is $50,000. The City holds easements on twice as much property as the 35 feet of Third Street which the Park owns (but the City has a street easement). It was staff’s position that the reciprocal action to vacate ownership and right-of-way plus the completion of the suggested improvements was a reasonable compensation to the City. This financial proposal is, of course, subject to Council review and recommendation for revisions or additional compensation in whatever manner deemed appropriate.
C. Economic:
Resolving the issue of City street easements will allow the Association to continue purchase of their Park. Their acquisition of the Park will result in dramatic improvements to the Park infrastructure and visual environment. Their actions will preserve an existing affordable home environment for seniors and families and accentuate the whole Ash Ave./Marsh milieu. The street improvements proposed will enhance the Marsh project by providing safe and attractive parking for Marsh users, thereby opening up spaces at the end of Ash for beach and launch access.
D. Legal:
The City Attorney will be present Monday night to answer questions relating to the legal issues involved with the MOU and any corresponding issues or actions.
IV. action options:
V. Attachments:
VI. Principal parties expected at meeting:
David Fainer, attorney for the Association
Ray Cole, President of the Association
John Gilmore, Past Present of the Association
Recommendation:
Staff believes this proposal represents a fair and equitable resolution to the City issues involved in the Association’s plans to purchase and improve the Park. It also represents an opportunity to complete the street improvements to Ash Avenue that will be aesthetically pleasing and functional, both to the Park residents as well as visitors to their Park and those enjoying the Marsh and public beach.
Staff recommends that the Council approve, by Motion, the proposal and approve the MOU in its current or a revised form.