HomeMy WebLinkAboutSS2 - City Parkland Encroachment• CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Study Session Item No. 2
April 13, 2004
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: General Services Department
David E. Niederhaus, Director, 949- 644- 3055,dniederhaus @city.newport-
beach.ca.us
SUBJECT: City Parkland Encroachment
ISSUE:
Should private encroachment be allowed on City parkland, or in some cases should the
is public be permitted to purchase City parkland with certain restrictions?
RECOMMENDATION:
None, informational report only.
HISTORY:
Encroachment issues have developed at Irvine Terrace and Kings Road Parks for which
staff is requesting direction of the Council.
At Irvine Terrace Park, a number of residents have developed, and in some cases
fenced, part of the City parkland property located along the western Park boundary. At
this location, several past or current property owners acquired legal ownership of
portions of the Park as late as 15 years ago, but several large and extensive
encroachments continue without resolution. A land survey and title search would be
required to confirm the exact amount of each encroachment.
At the request of the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission, staff presented an
informational briefing at the February 3, 2004 Commission meeting with numerous
photographs of the private improvements on Irvine Terrace parkland. Several interested
property owners attended the meeting and shared the history of the parkland in
• question. Staff was directed by the Commission to undertake a further study of the
alternatives to resolve the encroachments.
City Parkland Encroachments
April 13, 2004
Page 2
•
The single private encroachment at Kings Road Park involves minor private
improvements on public property and is located on the eastern Park boundary. The
current improvements were discovered in December 2003 and included fencing,
landscaping, and irrigation which were installed by a previous owner.
Staff is reviewing additional historical documents related to the past sale of Irvine
Terrace Park. More information will be provided at the study session presentation
including aerial views and photos of the actual nature and extent of the encroachments.
DISCUSSION:
Kings Road Park
In December 2003, staff mailed the attached correspondence to Mr. and Mrs. Walter F.
Hackler, the property owners of 1721 Kings Road (Attachment A). The letter listed
concerns regarding public access, encroachment onto City parkland, and overgrown
shrubs along the easterly boundary of the Park.
In January, the Hacklers requested an Encroachment Permit be approved by staff to
allow them to keep the encroached park property as is. Staff denied this request. The •
Hacklers subsequently appealed to the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission.
At the March 2, 2004 PB &R Commission meeting, staff recommended that the
encroachment permit be denied for the approximately 1,000 square feet of private
improvements which includes landscaping, irrigation, and fencing (Attachment B). The
Commission voted to deny the encroachment permit, but also directed a 60 day delay in
the removal of the private improvements to allow staff to conduct an appraisal and land
survey of the encroachment.
Since that time the Hacklers have sent a letter to City staff which indicated that they
have completed an informal survey of their property and would like to purchase the City
parkland property on which they have encroached upon.
Irvine Terrace Park Encroachments
Four of the six Malabar Avenue property owners whose properties are adjacent to the
western boundary of Irvine Terrace Park have encroached onto City parkland to varying
degrees. The encroachments which have occurred are in some cases minimal and in
other cases extensive landscape improvements and structures on City parkland
property. The addresses where these encroachments have occurred are adjacent to
712, 718, 724, and 730 Malabar Drive (Attachment C). The areas of encroachment •
onto the City parkland vary from 30 feet to almost 80 feet. Staff has contacted the six
•
City Parkland Encroachments
April 13, 2004
Page 3
Malabar Avenue property owners and has informed them of the Council discussion
regarding this issue. A number of affected residents have indicated interest in either an
encroachment permit or the purchase of City parkland.
State Law— Disposition of Parkland
California State law addresses the sale of public parkland. Depending upon the
circumstances, there may be limitations on the City's ability to sell parkland. If the
Council wishes to pursue this option, City Attorney staff will conduct further research
related to the sale of parkland.
SUMMARY:
The two encroachment areas have similar characteristics, such as being inaccessible to
the general public, a reduced value to the City, and each has at least one City utilities
easement. The Irvine Terrace Park open area that is the location of the encroachments
was fenced by the City over 30 years ago to prevent public access, noise and
vandalism and promote privacy and security to adjacent property owners. In addition,
the Council did authorize the sale of some of the parkland to four of the adjacent
property owners in 1976. Staff is researching the details of the transfer. However, to
191 staffs knowledge there have been no approvals of private encroachments onto
parkland or the sale of parkland in recent times. Staff is providing this report and a
Power Point presentation for the purpose of receiving Council direction on the
disposition of City parkland.
ALTERNATIVES:
A. Approve /Deny all proposed or existing private encroachments of City parkland on
an individual basis after initial review by the staff and the PB & R Commission.
B. Approve /Deny the sale of parkland properties on which neighboring property
owners have encroached on an individual basis following City appraisal of the
property value and applicability of State law. The requestor would pay the full
cost of the land survey and appraisal in advance of consideration without any
guarantee of reimbursement or approval by the Council.
C. Provide direction to the PB & R Commission and staff on the City's position
regarding long term use or sale of parklands in the future.
Or
D. Direct staff to prepare a Council policy on the disposition of City parkland that is
• in compliance with State law to include direction on the use of any funds
generated by the sale of parkland.
Prepared by:
Parks and Trees Superintendent
City Parkland Encroachments
April 13, 2004
Page 4
Submitted by:
David E. Niederhaus,
Director
Attachments: (A) December 2003, letter to Mr. and Mrs. Walter F. Hackler
(B) Aerial photo of Kings Road Park and Hackler's property at 1721
Kings Road
(C) Aerial map of Irvine Terrace Park
•
u
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
• GENERAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT
David E. Niederhaus. Director
December 8, 2003
Mr. and Mrs. Walter Hackler ap�
1721 Kings Road v
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Hackler,
Staff has investigated the area relative to City property at Kings Road Park that is adjacent to your
residence regarding public access, encroachment into the park and overgrown shrubs. The purpose
of this letter is to clarify the City's position relative to these issues.
The existing wooden steps on the eastside of the Park are inappropriate and unsafe for your
gardener to continue accessing to your backyard for landscape maintenance. Please inform your
gardener not to use the Park and the stairway for access to your property since it presents a liability
to the City.
• The City will be trimming and removing the overgrown shrubs and seedlings on City property along
the easterly park boundary. Additionally, the City will also be installing a 3 -foot green colored
chain link fence along this property line to keep the public from access to your property.
is
Please remove all private improvements from the park property on the eastern boundary of the Park
by December 31, 2003.
Please contact Marcelino Lomeli, Parks and Trees Maintenance Superintendent at (949) 644 -3069 if
you have any questions.
Sincerely,
David E. Niederhaus
General Services Director
DEN/pr
cc: Associate Civil Engineer
Parks and Tree Superintendent
3300 Newport Boulevard • Post Office Box 1768 • Newport Beach, California 92658 -8915
Telephone: (949) 6443055 • Fax: (949) 650 -0747 • www.dty.newport-beach ca.us
-- -
4t.
k ---
s
K.
lA
14eAW
MAJ
&I W—W
V j
X a
� 4
'L 1
y
l4'
'L•.»_ ...� . ice..
Encroachment • -
Irvine Terrace J .� `
t
r. �
\ S
- \„ •Jib.'
Z Y..
t :,,M. .epw �• u� ai xti ;
� 4
r
}w
.. f4
"RECTED AFTER AGEND
--- -- Gr_g_nai Messaa - -- AR"IiED.-" _ a
F--or,: rem: iaura Curran [s;a it =:_ : - auracurraz @mac . com] r sC�
San-: Tuesday, April 13, 2:_iO4 11:15 AiM
^o: u- dgeway @city.newpor=- beacn.c=.us; dandee @e_ -thlin }-.net; jHFF@acl.ccm;
Garold adams @hot : cail.cos -; acn'wenb@earz,iink.net; nbcoum_il @rani ^hols.in'c;
council @city.newport- b_a. :h.ca.cs
Cc: mlome '- i @c_ty.newpert- bea.-h._a.us; drieaerhausfc _�y.nawper_- baach.ca.us
Subject: Irvine Terrace Pa -k
City Caur' -i1 Members
I urge you to - ecoira.end a f - -dire of IQC on the possible sale of Newport Be= park _and
Irv'_ne Terrace and Kings E_ad.
A sale of _'nis type could set a bad preceden_ in our Citv.
:ere are my ?s to you:
For example, if a sa_e were app -oved, would mean. that I can build a s=mall un t on my
Parkway or a balco.v it the alley, be_h C_ty Property in Corona del Mar, and -hen tell the
C -ty that I want to add this property to my plot p_an, and shoo -d be al -owed to since "I
have made improvements "? _f that's the case, I'll srarc buildir-g now...
Could I decide to -emove a City tree from my property, in v- elation of the Reforestation
pc-icy, because I decided I wanted to make c -her improvements?
Also, why is the City paying to install cretin fences (descr -bed i- the briefing) for
homeowners who are adjacent to the park^ If you move into that Gtion, you know that you
are adjacent to, t:-e park and you are responsible to build yo:__ own fence w_thin C__y
guidelines. -
When I lived in Tust_n near Centennial Par, we homeowners had cur own fences to ma--fain
and we called oc1'ce _f there were issues wit, vandalism or people intruding. We didr-'t
as }_ the City to pay for more fencing because we were adjacent to a park walkway, as I was.
CcS—_a Mesa did the right tFing in denying the recent parkland acqa4sition. NB should do
the same, and empand the park for users.
Thank you
Laura Curran
437 Dahlia
Newpor_ Beach, CF 52625
1
ISSUES
Encroachment issues have developed at
Irvine Terrace and Kings Road Parks for
which staff is requesting direction of the
Council.
-.*-Should private encroachment be allowed on City
parkland?
4•Should the public be permitted to purchase City
parkland with certain restrictions?
HISTORY
Kings Road Park
•:• Private encroachment which involves minor
private improvements on public property.
❖Located on the eastern Park boundary.
-:-The current improvements were discovered in
December 2003 and included fencing,
landscaping, and irrigation.
DISCUSSION
Kings Road Park
•: In December 2003. staff mailed correspondence
to the property owners of 1721 Kings Road. The
letter listed concerns regarding public access,
encroachment onto City parkland, and
overgrown shrubs along the easterly boundary
of the Park.
In January 2004, the property owners requested
an Encroachment Permit, in order to keep the
encroached park property as is. Staff denied
their request.
Kings Road Park Discussion
March 2. 2004 Parks. Beaches and Recreation
Commission meeting. staff recommended:
•3The encroachment permit be denied for the
approximately 1.000 square feet of private
improvements.
PB & P directed a 60 day delay in the removal of the
private improvements to allow staff to conduct an
appraisal and land survey of the encroachment.
Kli L?
is /_
_` Y-
7
u
X f
r
��
t'
10
r
il
•.!
'` •
_
r4.
�'
lT, 1
F
EL
4
Area to Left of 1 Stakes City Park — Area to Right of Red Stakes
Hackler Property
10
HISTORY
Irvine Terrace Park
The Irvine Terrace Park western boundary
fence was constructed to prevent public
access, noise and vandalism and promote
privacy and security to adjacent property
owners.
A number of residents have developed. and in
some cases, fenced part of the City parkland
property located along the western Park
boundary.
❖ Past or current property owners acquired legal
ownership of portions of the Park.
• :• Several large and extensive encroachments
continue without resolution.
Irvine Terrace Park
•:•On February 3, 2004 staff presented an
informational briefing to the Parks. Beaches and
Recreation Commission.
Staff was directed by the Commission to
undertake a further study of the alternatives to
resolve the encroachments.
DISCUSSION
Irvine Terrace Park
-*-There are six property owners who have encroached
onto City parkland.
•:•En:croachments which have occurred are minimal and
in other cases include extensive landscape
improvements and structures on City parkland
property.
-*o The areas of encroachment onto the City parkland
vary from 30 feet to almost 30 feet.
•*oA number of affected property owners have indicated
interest in either an encroachment permit or the
purchase of City parkland.
NI
PV
15
�` .. r� mod, �� °/�
p, ,f �.�
a'. '.. ' �' ...
.. ..�: � �
l: � _}}}F
l�t _
^ y
�, . _
.. •j - y
��_��. \ j4 �'
} �,'�, �.
fir$. � � � 5��2
�'y l'�`�_�i. �t 'I'.
��;�� '
}
I% � �' �)�('�� \jl� \r\ sit r `• l- f f
'!t!. a '-�`�' Ib �Ii�� - {'\ R;• s r •j t..,
IZ �` y!s'vY � • fT} �4 ] N � .• ye ty- ' -j' r' ' .:; rl
'- �Jtl'J iP��. r}. vt✓ �r !{ifM1 {ti' i t �
'a { /�II rl`�'�',F, � ��-{�i ��irl �„ .: ,.�•,:'7�r`'v y�!' r Je,,
r+ ! �' ✓s }piy rT�t� r� lr' �� fi +f. l�� k ,, ` 1� 'r
i i x %/tir f [J dJ• A(r 7 r,, d .•.., l w ♦ ,� t.
jip
. �rsJ.fl i•l`j r' ^'•~I•f.' }'il� +l.... 1.... L "' _ � .mil �V. .\ \..✓ ! i!(.... .;a ♦ ..
' Property Line
Property.Un `.
Y_4
. •f .•
.rte[.
Property Line
• •� :,. . may%;:::, . ;_
,•, _
{
Property Line
it _.. ".��• .. _ •, s'•��`S' p �. � ' �s
,;'
;� i ' ' $' .w.. � -a r.•..4�t f �.� 1.: 1M�171.0 r ..
�r •� r
' %it _ ,{ fit•
i
°U�"3�y /,j•i �VN rr 3�a.�ar. p� rt�y�: -0;fN�� .'n. -7i '�r
<���i �', i'a�1'f� rat, .. ?f�i i r y��r•� ��f. i': r St' _.
.y :k
Or
Property Lin,
23
Property iine_--�'
} Y
yF
r _r
Property Line
C.
/• Y ,
F yy. 2'.. ` � �
... ✓�.i .. �.
w.
I
�K1F _
Property "Line , ,
`, .. '�� nib.. °YY.j .. 4 .a•, � ,; ��' �: - -� �.
:�� .... t;�. �:
:.�
NE,
29
{
.. c:. ,. PTpeitjFtk i
• .... . • �.. _ .; , :. way.. "'
to
1"
L
State Law — Disposition of Parkland
-.-California State law addresses the sale Of public
parkland.
•;•Depending upon the circumstances, there may
be limitation(s) on the City's ability to sell
parkland.
-*.-If the Council wishes to pursue this option. City
Attorney staff will conduct further research
related to the sale of parkland.
SUMMARY
•;•The encroachment areas at both parks are
inaccessible to the general public, have a
reduced value to the City, and each has at least
one City utilities easement.
*;•The Council did authorize the sale of some of
Irvine Terrace parkland to four of the adjacent
property owners in 1976.
❖There have been no further approvals of private
encroachments onto parkland or the sale of
parkland in recent times.
ALTERNATIVES
1 Approve /Deny all proposed or existing private encroachments
of City parkland on an individual basis after initial review by
the staff and the PS & R Commission.
2 Approve /Deny the sale of parkland properties on which
neighboring property owners have encroached on an
individual basis following City appraisal of the property value
and applicability of State law.
3 The requestor would pay the full cost of the land survey and
appraisal in advance of consideration without any guarantee
of reimbursement or approval by the Council.
4 Provide direction to the PB & R Commission and staff on the
City's position regarding long term use or sale of parklands in
the future.
Or
5 Direct staff to prepare a Council policy on the disposition of
City parkland that is in compliance with State law to include
direction on the use of any funds generated by the sale of