HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Bill 4.APart1 11/15/2010i
DATE: November I5, 2010
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City uncil through City Manager
FROM: Vincent Marengo, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of a Resolution of Necessity Determining
that Public Interest and Necessity Require. Acquisition of Certain Real
Property and Real Property Interests, and Directing the Filing of Eminent Domain
Proceedings for the U.S. 101 /East Washington Street Interchange Project (City
Project Number RDA1.00208), In and To a Portion of the Property Located at
101 -181 North McDowell Blvd. (APN 077- 340 - 007), Owned by "Novak
Property, LLC"
RECOMMENDATION
City p
It is recommended that the Council adopt the attached Resolution of Necessity determining
that the public interest and necessity require acquisition of certain.real property and real property
interests, and directing the filing ofeminent domain proceedings forthe U.S. 101 /East
Washington Street Interchange Project (City Project. Number.RDA100208), in and to a portion of
the property located at 101 -181 North McDowell Blvd. (APN 077 -340 -007), owned by "Novak
Property, LLC"
BACKGROUND
A. Required Findings for Adoption:
1. That the public interest and necessity require the Project;
2. That the Project is planned or located, in the manner that will be the most
compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury;
3. That the Subject Property is necessary for the Project;
4. That the Subject Property is being acquired fora compatible use and will not
unreasonably interfere with or impair the continued public use, if any, as it now
exists or may reasonably be: expected to exist in the future; and
5. That-the Subject Property is being acquired for a more necessary use than the use
to which the property is appropriated, if any.
Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council:
P Consider all evidence presented on whether the public, interest and necessity require the
Agenda.keview:
City Attorney Finance Director City Manager
Project.
o Consider all evidence presented on whether the Project is planned or located in the
manner that will be the most compatible with the greatest public good and least private
injury.
Consider all evidence presented on whether the subject prop_ erty is necessary for the
Project.
If, based on the evidence presented, the City Council finds and determines each of the
aforementioned, then staff recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed Resolution of
Necessity.
B. Reasons for the Recommendation:
It is necessaryto acquire the Subject, Property in order to obtain possession in time to meet
contract and construction schedules and deadlines. To have the Project certified, the City (and/or
Caltrans) must be in possession and/or ownership of all of the property and property interests
necessary for certification by Caltrans, in order for the project to be ready to list by January
2011. (To qualify a project as 'Ready to List', the project must have all clearances and approvals
necessary to advertise a project. This includes having all permits agreements, appropriate Right
of Way certification, and FTIP (Federal Transportation Improvement Program) approval.) Staff
recommends adoption of the attached Resolution of Necessity, Attachment 1, which authorizes
the commencement of eminent domain proceedings to acquire the :Subject Property, as stated
herein. The proposed Resolution makes the required findings that the City Council is authorized
to acquire the Subject Property through its eminent domain powers by filing an action in court.
The Resolution must be.approyed by a two- thirds vote. Therefore,, as the City Council is a
seven - member body, the Resolution must be adopted by five affirmative votes.
C. Alternatives
The City Council may choose to not adopt the Resolution of Necessity for the Subject Property
and direct staff to continue negotiations. This action would, however, most likely delay the
Project and possibly funding sources. Negotiations with the owners can continue,
notwithstanding the adoption of the Resolution of Necessity or even the filing of an action in
eminent domain.
D. Result of Recommended Action
Action on the Resolution. of Necessity will authorize the filing of an action in eminent domain to
acquire the subject property interests for the Project.
E. Proposed Procedure
.Staff recommends that the City Council: (a) hear presentations from staff, (b) open the hearing
and' allow the property owners, who have given notice of their intention, to speak, ; (c) allow
2
staff and/or counsel to respond to any issues raised by the property owners; (d) ask questions of
staff and" /or counsel; (d) close the hearing to noticed parties; (e) allow general public comment;
(e) detiberate; :and (f) adopt the attached Resolution of Necessity which makes the necessary
findings and authorizes the commencement of eminent domain proceedings for the acquisition.
The proposed Resolution of Necessity involves the acquisition of the following from the affected
property owned by Novak Property, LLC: partial fee acquisition, a Joint Trench. easement, a
Water and Sanitary Sewer Easement, and a Temporary Construction Easement in Assessor's
Parcel Number ( "APN "): 007 - 340 -007 (the "Subject Property ").
The Subject Property is being acquired for the East Washington Street — Highway 101
Interchange Improvements Project (City Project Number RDA 100208) (the "Project "). The
Project will modify the existing interchange at Washington Street,, improving three quadrants of
the interchange, in order to among; other goals, upgrade same'to current safety and operational
,standards, provide for safe pedestrian:and bicycle access; improve traffic circulation and
capacity; and accommodate Tor planned and anticipated growth. The affected property consists
of 616,217 square feet and is improved with a regional shopping center containing a total of
176,135 square feet.
Pursuant to the provisions of section 1245.235 of California Code of Civil Procedure, notice has
been given to all persons whose property is to be acquired by eminent domain and whose names
and addresses appear on the last Sonoma County equali2ed assessment roll, all of whom have
been given reasonable opportunity to appear and be heard before the City Council on each of the
matters it must consider priorto adopting the proposed Resolution of Necessity.
1. ' Project Need and Description
The East Washington Street— Highway 101 Interchange Improvements (C -1) Project consists of
interchange improvements along the East Washington Street.Interchange portion of U.S. Route
101 ( "Route 101") in Petaluma, California. The Project site, which includes a segment of Route
101 between Caulfield Lane and the Lynch Creek overcrossng, is located entirely within the
limits of the City of Petaluma. This portion of Route 101 consists of a four -lane highway
mainline, with two northbound and two southbound lanes. The existing on- and off -ramps to
Route 101 along this stretch of highway feed traffic to and from the mainline of Route 101 onto
East Washington Street, a local -four lane roadway. The Project site is located in an area
comprising of a mix of land uses, including residential, commercial and light industrial uses.
The main purpose of the proposed Project is to reduce present recurring traffic congestion and to
help - _provide for future vehicular traffic, consistent with the General Plan 2025 (which is
incorporated herein by this reference); to improve access and circulation between Route 101 and
local streets; and enhance safety and operations.
Recurring traffic congestion routinely backs up onto the mainline during morning and evening
hours. According to Caltrans' Initial Study with Mitigated Negative'Declaration, dated March
2008, forecasted 2030 traffic volumes at the East Washington Street Interchange indicate that
predicted increases in congestion would result in unacceptable and significant operational
conditions unless improvements are made at this location. The Petaluma .General Plan 2025
identifies the Washington. Street Interchange. Project as�a planned improvement.
Currently, the local street connections to Route 101 are congested. The proposed northbound,
diagonal on -ramp would relieve congestion on the local streets, specifically at the intersection of
East Washington Street and the Route 101 northbound ramps.
Traffic accident data for the .Project were obtained from Caltrans for a three -year period (April 1,
2001 — March 31, 2004). (Said data is incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set
forth herein.) The primary collision factors were speeding and improper turns. The high
percentage of rear -end collisions on dry pavement during daylight hours, combined with
speeding, indicates that a contributing factor for many accidents was traffic congestion. The
improvements identified as part of this Project are intended to help alleviate traffic congestion in
the Project area, thus reducing the potential for these types of collisions.
The main elements of the Project consist of reconfiguring the southbound on -ramp, widening the
terminus of the northbound off -ramp from two lanes to four lanes, and adding a new northbound
diagonal on -ramp with a new bridge to free -span Washington Creek as follows: (1) Southwest
Quadrant — existing southbound diagonal on -ramp would be realigned to improve the curve
radius and to include two lanes; (2) Southeast Quadrant — at the terminus of the northbound
diagonal off -ramp, the lanes would be widened from two to four lanes, portions of the existing
lanes of the northbound loop on -ramp would be reconstructed to carry traffic movement from
northbound off -ramp to westbound East Washington Street; (3) Northeast Quadrant — a new
northbound two -lane on -.ramp would be added with a new bridge to span Washington Creek,
eliminating the need for the existing westbound left -turn movement. A retaining wall will be
constructed. Existing underground and above - ground facilities would be relocated within a
utility easement. East Washington Street would be widened to accommodate a right -turn lane to
handle traffic from westbound East Washington Street to northbound Route 101. Traffic signals
on East Washington would be synchronized between McDowell Boulevard intersection and
northbound off -ramp intersection; (4) Washington Creek Bridge— the proposed bridge over
Washington Creek would be a pre -cast clear span concrete structure (119.6 feet long).
2. CALTRANS — NEPA/CEQA - Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
( "MND ")
Caltrans, the lead agency for the Project, released the Project Initial Study on November 14,
2007 and held a public open house on November 29,, 2007 to give the public an opportunity to
review and comment on the document and the Proj ect. The comment period ended on December
14, 2007.
Caltrans concluded that impacts due to the proposed Project would be minor and a Categorical
Exclusion (CE) would be prepared for NEPA compliance. Per the Council on Environmental
Quality Regulations Implementing NEPA, CE refers to "a category of actions which do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment and which have
been found to have no such effect in procedures adopted by a Federal agency in adoption of
11
these procedures (Section 1, 507.3) and for which, therefore; neither an environmental assessment
nor an environmental impact statement is required" (40 CRF 1.508.4):
The Initial Study with Mitigated Negative Declaration, dated March 10, 2008, prepared by the
State of California Department of Transportation for the Project (including the Site Investigation.
Report -and all.other reports cited within the MND), is available to view in the City Clerk's
office. Caltrans approved the MND on March 10, 2008, and it and the MND are incorporated
herein by this reference as though fully set forth herein. .
3. Project Approvals
On June 1, 2009, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2009 -075, authorizing the City
Manager to execute a cooperate agreement between the City and Caltrans for Plans,
Specifications and Estimates (PS &E) and right of way acquisitions for the Project. Resolution
No. 2009 -075 is incorporated here_ in by this reference as Attachment 2, as though fully set forth
herein.
On June 3, 2009, the City entered into a "Cooperative Agreement with the State of California to
complete the PS &E and right of way phases of the Project. The City agreed to be the
implementing agency for both PS &E and right of way. The June 3, 2009 Cooperative
Agreement is incorporated herein by this reference as Attachment 3, as though fully set forth
herein.
Pursuant to the Cooperative Agreement, the City is authorized to finance, design and acquire all
lands and property interests necessary for the Project.
The City also entered into a "Cooperative Agreement" with the Sonoma County Transportation
Authority on October 26, 2009, regarding funding for the Project. The City's Cooperative
Agreement with SCTA is incorporated herein by this reference as Attachment 4, as though fully
set forth herein.
On October 19, 2009, the City adopted Resolution No.. 200,9-172, authorizing the City to seek
authorization from the State to conduct resolutions of necessity' hearings for the Project, if
necessary. Resolution No. 2009 -172 is incorporated herein by this reference as Attachment 5, as
though fully set forth herein.
Caltrans approved the City's request to hear the resolutions of necessity, if any, on September
30, 2010. Said.approval is incorporated herein by this reference as Attachment 6, as though fully
set forth herein.
4. Notice-of Hearing on the Resolution of Necessity
On October 1, 2010, pursuant to Caltrans regulations and California statute, the City provided
written notice to the property owners of its intention to adopt a resolution of necessity after a
hearing on November 15, 2010. The City's letter and "Notice of Intention to Adopt Resolution
5
of Necessity" served on Novak Property, LLC is incorporated -herein by this reference as
Attachment 7, as though fully set forth herein.
5. The Subject Property and Proposed Acquisition
The subject parcel is owned by The Novak Property, LLC, agent is Jeffrey L.'Novak. As stated
above, a shopping center is on the parcel which has several tenants, including Raley's, Big 5
Sporting Goods, and Radio Shack. It is managed by McViking 11 (Petaluma), LLC.
The proposed Resolution of Necessity involves the acquisition of the following:
Highway Easement
4,750 square meters [51,129 square feet]
Caltrans' Parcel 602984
Joint Trench Easement
377 square meters [4,058 square feet]
Caltrans' Parcel 60298 -2
Sanitary Sewer and Water Easement
526 square meters [5,662 square feet]
Caltrans' Parcel 60298 -3
Temporary Construction Easement
1,410 square meters [ 15,177 square feet]
Caltrans' Parcel 602984
Legal descriptions and maps for the proposed acquisitions are set forth in Exhibits "A," "A -1,"
"D" and "D -1" attached to the proposed. Resolution of Necessity,
attached hereto `as Attachment 1.
The 'City is vested with the. power of eminent domain to acquire real property interests at 101-
181 North McDowell Blvd., Petaluma, California, by virtue of Article 1, Section 19, of the
Constitution of the State of California; California Code of Civil Procedure sections 1240.010 -
124:0.05,0, 1240.110, 1240.1.20, 1`240.150, 1240.350; California Government Code sections
37350.5, 373.53, 39792, 38900, 40401 and 40404; City of Petaluma Resolution No. 2009 -172;
City of Petaluma Resolution No. 2009 =075; "Cooperative Agreement" between the City of
Petaluma and Caltrans dated June 3, 2009; "Cooperative Agreement" between City of Petaluma
and Sonoma County Transportation Authority dated June 2009; and approval by Caltrans for the
East Washington Street/Highway 101 Interchange Improvements Project, all of which are
incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth herein.
6. Offer to Purchase
On August 23, 2010, the City made a written offer to purchase the Subject Property based on an
independent appraisal. City staff and the City's right -of -way consultant have had a number of
31
discussions with'the property owners, who understand the Project and the need for the City to
acquire the property. Negotiatiion'& with the property owners are progressing and a purchase
price has been agreed upon. Close of escrow is anticipated by the end of December 2010.
However, staff' recommends proceeding; with this resolution of necessity to preserve the City's
eminent domain rights, should negotiations fall through. The amount of compensation to be paid
to the property owners is not a required finding and passage of the Resolution of Necessity is not
dependent on determining the amount to be paid. In order to meet critical deadlines, the
Project's schedule requires that the City proceed with the hearing at this time.
DISCUSSION
Adoption of the Resolution of Necessity and Findings:
By adopting: the proposed Resolution of Necessity, the City Council will authorize the filing of
an eminent domain action to acquire the Subject Property, as aforementioned. Before adopting
the Resolution of Necessity, the City Council must make the following findings based on
evidence presented at the hearing:
1. The public interest and.:necessity require the Project.
The acquisition of private property for a public right -of -way has long been regarded as a
"public use" for which the use of eminent domain is justified. Here, there are several
statutes in the California Code of Civil Procedure and Cali'forriia Government Code
authorizing the use of eminent domain for purposes of constructing, improving and /or
expanding public right -of -ways. (California Code of Civil Procedure sections 1240.010 -
1240.050, 1240.110- 1240..120, 1240.610; Government Code _sections 37350.5, 37353,
39792, 40401, 40404.)
The Project is needed to reduce .congestion for morning and evening commuters, to solve
current operational and safety deficiencies, and to accommodate anticipated and planned
growth within the City and the region, which is consistent with the adopted General Plan.
An expanded interchange will provide for centralized regional access for both local and
cross -town circulation. These efforts will also enhance the economic viability of the
City's commercial and retail base. Pedestrian crossings, as well as ADA and bicycle
access will be replaced to current standards.
2. The proposed project is planned or located in a manner that will be the most compatible
with the greatest public good and the least private injury.
Efforts were made to minimize the number of properties and property interests needed
and to reduce other negative impacts without compromising the Project. However, unless
the interchange were completely moved, the improvements to same must be located
where they are currently proposed which provides the least private injury with the
greatest public good. Portions of the Project are set forth within a vacant lot and other
portions, including those within the subject parcel are within a reserved area for future
freeway purposes, property already encumbered with existing easements (drainage and
7
utility), and /or landscaping. The Project does not take away any visitor parking or affect
circulation or loading dock areas.; The Project includes the relocation of existing fencing
and replanting of some of the removed trees and landscaping. A no- project alternative
was considered; however, in that instance, the public safety and traffic congestion issues
would continue to worsen. Thus, the no- project alternative was rejected.
3. The property interests described in the Resolution of Necessity are necessary for the
Project.
Due to the location of the Subject Property, the Project cannot go forward without
acquisition of the Subject Property as listed herein. 'There is no alternative land on which
to realign the Project without creating a greater' impact or without compromising the
Project. The existing residential neighborhood on the southeast corner of the interchange
poses a significant physical constraint to interchange modifications. The Project
placement has taken into consideration and places the Project within the landscaping and
existing easements as much as possible.
4. The offer required by Government Code section 7267.2 has been made to the owner of
record.
A written offer to purchase and an appraisal summary statement for the Subject Property
was provided to the owners on August 23, 2010. The City and property owners have
reached an agreement on purchase price.
The Subject Property interests are being acquired for a compatible use such that the City's
use of the Subject Property will not interfere with or impairthe continued use of the
Subject Property for the public use that exists or mayreasonably be expected to exist in
the future on the Subject Property, pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure
Section 1240.510.
The Subject Property may be affected by other public utility easements and /or an
easement in favor of the City of Petaluma for drainage purposes. The acquisitions and
use of the Subject Property for the public use required for the Project will not interfere
with or impair the continuance of the City's public use as it exists or may reasonably be
expected to exist in the future, pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section
1240.510.
6. The use for which the Subject;Property is sought to be taken is a more necessary public
use than the use to which the property is currently appropriated, pursuant to California
Code of Civil Procedure section 1240.610.
The Subject Property is being acquired for a more necessary public use pursuant to
California Code of Civil Procedure section 1240.610, to wit, a public right of way.
Insofar as the Subject Property has been put to public use (per the aforementioned
easement), the acquisition and use of the Subject Property for public use by the City for
the Project is for a more necessary public use. Moreover, as previously indicated, the
8
City's use will not impact.any of the: current use for drainage purposes or any other public
use reasonably foreseeable in the future. If any current or future uses cannot co -exist
with the proposed use of the Subject Property, the proposed use should dominate.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS
Total project budget is $4M in PCDC funds and $1.27M Measure M 101 funds allocated for
right -of -way capital (Amendment Number One to the Sonoma County Transportation Authority
Cooperative Agreement) for atotal budget of $5.27M. The City's components of the project
include right -of way acquisition ^from,threeparcels, project design, Caltrans design services
(outlined in the approved cooperative agreement), design services during construction, and utility
relocation. The current project balance is $3,837,120.79.
ATTACIIWNTS
1. Resolution of Necessity for Acquisition of the Subject Property with the following
exhibits:
Exhibit A:
Legal Description of Highway Easement parcel (Caltrans' Parcel 60298 -1)
Exhibit A -1:
Plat Map of Highway Easement parcel' (Caltrans' Parcel 60298 -1)
Exhibit B:
Legal Description of Joint Trench Easement (Caltrans' Parcel 60298 -2)
Exhibit B -1:
Plat Map of Joint Trench Easement (Caltrans'. Parcel 60298 -2
Exhibit C:
Legal Description of Sanitary Sewer & Water Easement (Caltrans' Parcel
60298 -3)
Exhibit C -1:
Plat Map of Sanitary Sewer & Water Easement (Caltrans' Parcel 60298 -3)
Exhibit D:
Legal Description of Temporary Construction Easement (Caltrans' Parcel
60298 -4)
Exhibit D -1:
Plat Map of Temporary Construction Easement (Caltrans' Parcel 60298 -4)
2. Resolution No. 2009 -075
3. "Cooperative Agreement" with the State of California
4. "Cooperative Agreement" with the Sonoma County Transportation Authority
5. Resolution No. 2009 -1.72
6. Caltrans approval. of the City's request to hear the resolutions of necessity
1. "Notice of Intention to Adopt'Resolution of Necessity"
I
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY
DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC.INTEREST AND NECESSITY REQUIRE
ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY AND REAL PROPERTY
INTERESTS, AND DIRECTING' THE: FILING OF EMINENT DOMAIN
PROCEEDINGS
EAST WASHINGTON STREETMIGHVIWAY 101 INTERCHANGE
IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
101 - 181 N ; McDowell Boulevard, Petaluma, CA
(APN 007 - 340 -007)
Property Owner: The Novak Property, LLC
WHEREAS, the purpose of the East Washington Street/Highway 101 Interchange
Improvements Project (the "Project ") is to alleviate existing traffic- related impacts, which will
require that additional right -of -way be acquired along State Route 1`01 and the East Washington
Street Interchange to accommodate road widening and the relocation of utilities; and
WHEREAS, the Project is consistent with the adopted General Plans for the City of
Petaluma and the County of Sonoma, as well as the Sonoma County Transportation Authority for
East Washington Street; and
WHEREAS, California Streets and Highway Code section 130 authorizes the State of
California, Department of Transportation, ( "Caltrans ") and the City of Petaluma to enter into a
contract regarding the acquisition, construction, improvement, or maintenance of any State
Route; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Petaluma adopted Resolution No. 2009 -075
N.C.S. on June 1, 2009, to enter into a "Cooperative Agreement," dated June 3, 2009, with
Caltrans to construct the Project : improvements; and
WHEREAS, for the aboveyeasons; it is desirable and necessary for the City of Petaluma
to acquire a Highway Easement parcel (Caltrans' Parcel 60298 -1), a Joint Trench Easement
(Caltrans' Parcel 60298 -2), a Sanitary Sewer and Water Easement (Caltrans' Parcel 60298 -3)
and a Temporary Construction Easement (Caltrans' Parcel 60298 -4) in and to a portion of the
subject property, located 101. - 181 N. McDowell Boulevard, in the City of Petaluma, Sonoma
County, California, (Assessor's Parcel Number 007- 340 -007) as more particularly described in
10
Exhibits A, A -1., B, 3 -1, C, C -1, D, and D -1. which are attached hereto and made a part hereof by
this reference and are hereinafter referred to as °the: "Subject Property"; and
WHEREAS, the City of Petaluma is vested with the power of eminent domain to acquire
real property for the Project by virtue of Article 1, Section 19, of the Constitution of'the State of
California; California Code of Civil Procedure sections 1240.010 1240.050, 1240.110,
1240.120, 1240.150, 1240.350; California Government Code sections 37350.5, 37353, 39792,
38900, 40401 and 40404; City of Petaluma Resolution No. 2009 -172 N.C.S.; City of Petaluma
Resolution No. 2009 -075 N.C.S.; "Cooperative Agreement" between the City of Petaluma and
Caltrans dated June 3, 2009; "Cooperative Agreement" between City of Petaluma and Sonoma
County Transportation Authority dated October 26, 2009; approval by Caltrans for the East
Washington Street/Highway .101 Interchange Improvements Project; and;
WHEREAS, pursuant. to Code of Civil Procedure section 1245.235, the City of Petaluma
has provided the owners of the Subject Property, a copy of the "Notice of Intent to Adopt
Resolution of Necessity" informing them of the date and time any interested person can be heard
before the City Council, on the following matters, and to have the City Council give
consideration to testimony prior to deciding whether or not to adopt the proposed Resolution of
Necessity to commence eminent domain proceedings:
1. Whether the public interest and necessity require the Project;
2. Whether the Project is planned or located in the manner that will be most compatible with
the greatest public good and the least private injury;
3. Whether the property sought to be acquired is necessary for the Project;
4. Whether the offer required by Government Code section 7267.2 has been made to the
owner of record;
5. Whether the Subject Property is being acquired for a compatible use under Code of Civil
Procedure section 1240.510 in that the City's use of the property will not unreasonably
interfere with or impair the continued public use as it _now exists or may reasonably be
expected to exist in the future; and
6. Whether the Subject Property is being acquired for a more necessary public use under the
Code of Civil Procedure section 1240.610 in that the City's use of the property is a more
necessary public use than the use to which the property is appropriated; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of section 7267.2 of the Government Code of the
State of California, the City of Petaluma has made an offer to the owner of record to acquire the
11
Subject Property for just compensation and provided same with an appraisal summary statement;
and
WHEREAS, the City of Petaluma has satisfied the provisions and complied with all
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA ") and the National
Environmental Policy Act ( "NEPA "), and public notice has been given in the form provided by
law, and members of the public have been given an extensive opportunity for public review and
comment on the Project; and
WHEREAS, on October 19, 2009, the City Council adopted Resolution of Necessity No.
2009 -172 N.C.S. seeking authorization from Caltrans to conduct Resolution of Necessity
Hearings for the Project, and thereafter, the City received the aforementioned authorization from
Caltrans on September 30, 2010; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered this matter as an. item placed on its agenda at
its noticed meeting of November 15, 2010; and
WHEREAS, all the findings and conclusions made by the City Council pursuant to this
Resolution are based upon :substantial, evidence in the entire record before the City Council, and
not based solely on the information provided in this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, prior to taking action, the City Council has heard, been presented with, -
reviewed and considered all of the information and data in the administrative record, including
each of the Project- related documents relevant to the adoption of this Resolution, including but
not limited to, the General Plans of the City of Petaluma and the County of Sonoma, the
aforementioned resolutions, the Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment,
the Final Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment, and the Project Study
Report, and all oral and written evidence presented to it during all meetings and hearings; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has, endeavored in good faith to consider the pros and cons
of the issue before it, and specifically whether: (1) the public interest and necessity require the
Project; (2) the Project is planned or located in the manner that will be the most compatible with
the greatest public good and the least private injury; and (3,) the Subject Property is necessary for
the Project, in order to affirm each of the aforementioned prior to the application of its power of
eminent domain in this particular instance; and
WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of the Resolution have occurred.
NOW, 'THEREFORE, it is found, determined, and resolved by the City Council of the
City of Petaluma as follows:
12
1. The above recitals are true and correct and are matters on which these findings are based.
2. The public interest and necessity require this Project, and specifically for the construction
of the improvements to replace and expand the East Washington Street /Highway 101
Interchange in order to mitigate existing interchange operational and safety deficiencies.
3. The Project is planned and located in the manner that will be most compatible with the
greatest public good and the least private injury as determined, in part, after an extensive
environmental review process.
4. The taking of the highway easement parcel, joint trench easement, sanitary sewer and
water easement, and temporary construction easement, more particularly described and
depicted in Exhibits A through'D -1 are necessary for'the Project.
5. The offer required by Government Code section 7267.2 was made to the owner of record.
6. The proposed public use of the Project will not unreasonably 'interfere with or impair the
continuance of the public uses, if any, as they currently exist or may reasonably be
expected to exist in the future, pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section
1240.510.
7. The public use for which the Subject Property is sought to be. taken is a more necessary
public use than the public uses to which the property is currently appropriated, pursuant
to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1240.610.
8. While continuing to make every reasonable effort to acquire the Subject Property
interests by negotiation, the City Attorney of the City of Petaluma or his duly authorized
designee be, and is hereby, authorized and directed to institute and conduct to conclusion
an action in eminent domain for the acquisition of the Subject Property and to take such
action as may be deemed advisable or necessary in connection therewith.
9. An order for prejudgment possession may be obtained `in said action and a warrant issued
to the State Treasury Condemnation Deposit Fund, in the amount determined by the
Court to be so deposited, as a condition to the right of prejudgment possession.
1539631.1
13
4 � ..r. i
5 '+ � r
� t ,;. p F
1'�
Parcel 1 (60298 -1
Being a portion of the lands. of Maria I. Novak, Trustee: of the Maria I. Novak, Trust,
dated March 4, 1$91, :Darlene De Bernardi, successor Trustee under the Joanne
Novak St. Clair Irrevocable Trust Agreement dated December 23, 1996, and Joseph
Felix, a widower and Stanley M. Felix a married man, as his sole and separate
property, as Surviving Joint Tenants, as described in the Grant Deed recorded May
30, 1973 in Book 276,7, Page 460, the Quitclaim Deed - recorded March 26, 1991 as
Document No. 1991- 0026172, and the- Quitclaim Deed recorded August 3, 2009 as
Document No. 2009- 076131, all Official Records of the County of Sonoma, being more
particularly described;as follows:
Beginning at a point on the existing right of way of the State of California, as said right
of way is described in that Quitclaim Deed from J.L. Novak and Maria i'. Novak to the
State of California, filed October 7, 1953 in Book 1233 of`Official Records at Rage 381,
Sonoma County Records, said point lying at the southwesterly terminus of the course
recited as "N. 36 °25'29" E., 884.07 feet" in the last said deed;
thence from said POINT OF BEGINNING, along said existing right of way, North
37 °19'06" East, for a distance of 38.829 meters;
thence, leaving said existing right of way, North 74 °58'11" West, for a distance of
29.308 meters;
thence, along a tangent curve to the right, with a radius of 1.87.400 meters, through a
central angle of 02 for a distance of 9.737 meters;
thence, along a non - tangent -curve to the right, from a tangent that bears, North
81 °18'34" West, with radius of 60.960 meters, through a central angle of 21 °48'59 ",
for a distance of 23.212 meters;
thence, North 59 °29'33" West, for a distance of 53.992 meters;
.
thence, North 33 0 02'56" East, for a distance of 1.340 meters; v
thence, North 56 °57'04" West, for a distance of 49.777 meters;
thence, North 50 °53'08" West, for a distance of 18.692 meters;
thence, North 58 °22'44" West, for a distance of 30.000 meters;
thence, North 63 °14'46" West, for a distance of 18.239 meters;
thence North 60 °09'13" West, for a distance of 9.556 meters;
thence, North 62 °10'59" West, for a distance of 5.374 meters;
K:[Eng09lO99O84Oocsuegalst2421 _Novak Permanent Easement(ROWJ.doc
8112110
�5
thence, North 58 °224,4" West, for a distance of 0.809 meters to a point on the common
boundary of:sald lands of Novak, et al, and the lands of Syers Properties I, L.P., as
described in that Quitclaim Deed filed September 9, 2002, under Document No. 2002
135205, Official Records of the County of Sonoma;
thence, along said common boundary, South 36 °46'56" West, for a distance of 12.117
meters to a point on said existing right of way of the State of California;
thence, along said right of way, South 55 °24'34" East, for a distance of 243.755 meters
to the Point of Beginning.
Containing 4,750 square meters (0.475 hectares), more or less.
This conveyance is made for the purpose of a freeway and the grantor hereby releases
and relinquishes to the grantee any and all abutter's rights including access rights,
appurtenant to grantor's remaining property, in and to said freeway.
Basis of bearings: California Coordinate System NAD 83, Epoch 1991.35, Zone 3.
Divide the above distances by 0.999966886 to obtain ground distances.
Prepared by: \p �pt LAND S
BKF I Carlenzoli �`�S�Q� Thr0 �'9G
0
/ Exp.09130/11
No. 4760 D
Ralph H. homas, L S No. 4766,*
Lic. Exp. 9/30/11
K :IEng0910990841DocslLegals12421 Novak Permanent Easement(ROV�.doc
8/12/10
6LQ
1I
\�
i 9Y
�
,
.
..
. .
!( �
!
f
!
. � -
�
�
\
�
m S, wSHINoe, STRrcr
. !
■ §§ | §;|
� (
(` t
m
e;
!,|
P RQ
k ia
J
®' q 9
� ���i
\ /
\ spa
L
,.
.
\�
sec s_av: -oa: >,,rc acv�soxs - a.. - u. acmvons+ 1. JADE
HIS 7 �
. o
o -
m YY 99
s�srpl ° oo e � g� iS �
x u y Y3 a q � m
- z m
6
i v lie
B i•aO Eft 6'.�
O is
EF r
33 il
un sa¢
x-9'06'[ 36B.UJm
° wY wlNCTON sn?kT7 a p e
I IRE
O $4 Q fx
11
°
Ql
f
m�
@I
l$
e
um
o _� u
9
5 ID�
• '� �
C �
4� �
C
OZ~
igJ
G
s�
€ € 3v
6
i v lie
B i•aO Eft 6'.�
O is
EF r
33 il
un sa¢
x-9'06'[ 36B.UJm
° wY wlNCTON sn?kT7 a p e
I IRE
O $4 Q fx
11
2 - 0
Distribution Easement Rev. (07/09)
LD 2405 =07 -143'5
2010160 (0.1 -09 -021) 6 10 1
Lakeville — Petaluma C
Gas & Elec. Distribution
(APN 007 - 340 -007)
The strips of land situate in the city of Petaluma, county of Sonoma, state of California,
described as follows:
STRIP 1. A strip of land of the uniform width of 10 feet extending from the northwesterly
boundary line of Parcel No'. 1 as shown upon PARCEL MAP No. 6, filed for record December 13,
1968, in Book 109 • of Maps at page 15, Sonoma County Records, southeasterly to the
southwesterly boundary line of the strip of land designated "G&E" upon Pacific Gas and Electric
Company's Drawing No. 3039/800 attached to the Relocation Agreement between Maria I. Novak
and others dated May 25, 2005 and recorded as Recorder's Serial No. 2005081921, Official
Records of Sonoma County, and lying 5 feet on each side of the line described as follows:
Commencing at the found 2 -inch Brass Disk shown upon said PARCEL MAP No. 6
as marking the northwesterly terminus of a course in the center line of McDowell
Boulevard, (for identification only, said course as shown upon said. PARCEL MAP No. 6
has a bearing of N54'3 1'30"W and a length of 759.80 feet) and running
(a) south 27 west 888.72 feet
to a ,point in the northwesterly boundary line of said PARCEL No. 1, being the TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING of this line•, thence leaving said northwesterly boundary line
F '
(1) south 54'2817 17" east 275.76 feet; thence
(2) south 56 °57'04" east 161.00 feet; thence
,(3) south.)1' °16' 1:1" west 9.08 feet
to a point in said southwesterly boundary line.
STRIP 2. A strip of land of the uniform width of 5 feet, lying contiguous to and northwesterly
of the northwesterly boundary line of a strip of land delineated and designated "E" on said Drawing
No. 30391800 (for identification only, the center line of said strip as ,shown upon said Drawing has a
bearing of S 36° 05.5' W and a length of 153.2 feet), and extending southwesterly 136.31_ feet, as
measured along said northwesterly boundary line of said strip of land designated "E The sidelines
of said strip of land of the uniform .width of 5 feet shall be lengthened or shortened at the
northeasterly terminus thereof so as to terminate in said southwesterly boundary line.
The foregoing descriptions are based on a survey made by second party in April, 2010.
Bearings are based on the California Coordinate System (CCS83 EPOCH date 1991.35), Zone 3,
and are based on Global Positioning System (GPS) Observations. All distances used herein are grid
distances. To obtain ground distances, multiply ground by 0.99996886.
21
'0711 7 i l l f
22
23
o
z
Z
rn
mz zl APN 007 -350 -008
Lo
g r
m
m
n
m
_
I
g S36' 46'00 "W
i I (S35° 28 "W 914.2 i
z °z
I I MATCH LINE SEE SHEET 2
' c '^
-
a� I (N33 °03'03 "E) I O
• up ° E "( I
cn
62.4') (f) V) 0 N Vf -0--1 p Z Y
£ I I m m'rn m x � , m -• C IV V)
D I g: ;
8 mxtxtmmOc�m .
-. /ye Z a m iN �
oN
Z
a 57
N
W I F °2 c��� �I zzzzz - -•o i a' n—{3
- •� /)1. 9 o
p
_
00000 - -h< I A L1
_ � I iFi F. I N) r\) N,.NN�J� ip ro 0
'@5jo
to
f
Z "f • I O_.O O - 000 / I O V, 1--1
cn -� aa y�,g. °
0 o I (n
n
3
00000
C O I a�n d® I 0,000017 -"D I O
X N.N N IV N 0 -- m z
i
U
ME; ® d O Z
W MImmmrnZ3X z
(n am�0 0 CO CD CD
>a! I m0 . -•-i .p I
O &� N'W "41'�w W + C
M
m
n
�w I Il m� o f
O � .I arm cDQ NC.N� (D • I
a(A. - .O a cz
I (") O
-
OAzOm i n
" Z i + m- 0 %'
V)
m
F.1, , �o
r- . rr 1 0 zo
I O-' A m �
yy
b�
O �. m m Q 7 m f -0 N' m m I r z
WO
N. .a�I} \� 0 � �\',l.��i V1 01A N;NN ,�� �2 Im C
I
o cn
-- I , z i r m
w 0 2 / 011 LA ;: °
1 I
WO 1 2 a N � V i r (A N m m I r
C1
f
0 (l O
C7
(nc
ur
�; Z _
/L w_. _m m ° .oa o
W
m m
C7 z
Z
#
O �'D - O J z m w v I m v
Z � I
Ql
VI VI
m N O C r0
f m m I •-
2 m
Ln
I I v
O
x
n
��
rpa _ O _ O
/ y
N O+II O
D W NN m
Z -
m m
O D v ; e_llll
��'
rn
/ jj LAUREN
r-
`
83 0�
m M n
;I DRAINAGE CHANNEL EASEMENT 2749 '0R
n
215 j
N37° 23'00 "E
��
�D
IN36° 05'30 "E . '
883.68 I
��
ZO O i--•I O
m -V 3 D n z
r� m
w /
- -T --
`m �"� EAST WASHINGTON STREET
-n
n D
,o
4Z
mmf0
.�
n C m UUU
�
a �oo 2
Z a N m
<
II�mtA a o�l.
m n z O
\
z
D
Om0(A
+amp \
z
/ I.iz'v \\I f -
\\
\\
fT1 m
' nZON \\
O \\\ \ V I
mm Z OvNV)CrCc
/ \ O OD Cw cm mm Dx O N
D O I ��. X m xo m zm zx nx �- (D - +(D -•
1 m n 0 x 00 O- o- m u 'I + (D a 0
M -u 00 00
—)'�
n0 X M cu_ m _. zz +moo �1
C70W Am 2)Z ZZ 40 • -•7
E „I 536 °05'30 "W
m
c
o
n
Q
C
N
� ��' I 153.`2' om OO OC> - ut O o a nnw
_ (A c) Do a nno V'o (D
z c e ", m_o
,� j DRAINAGE CHANNEL P
z
z
T'
ij EASEMEN o om om or
D 2749 OR 215 w win z z N -+, -•
CA
O
zm
p -- O. • m -( m -( r n ib N m 0 7
°
w
z
V
Z
(A WN rm cam < x vvZ�o
,, r E. WASHINGTON Ln mJ0 �A mA m 3 =o
S 0
.n
0
�S7
0
z
F
i�
�” STREET , 0 — Z mZ n a w
O 1 m a m - C
w- m
: ti
--�
O
lJ1 O n N 00,000
Ljl�
Loo
co
o
M \ w ut z - w -•.p
N
n
N
K
- �� w m -i 0w70
} ��_- -� Vf Cr -0
p
co
z a CDO
G
(D
23
2�1
EXHIBIT 'A'
Parcel 1166298-3
Being a portion of the lands of Maria I. Novak., Trustee of the Maria I. Novak, Trust,
dated March 4, 1991 Darlene Kehoe,,successor Trustee under the Joanne Novak St.
Clair Irrevocable Trust Agreement;, dated December 23, 1996, and Joseph Felix, a
widower and Stanley -M. Felix a married man, as his-sole and separate property, as
Surviving Joint Tenants, as described in those deeds recorded in Book 2767 of Official
Records at Page 460, Document No. 19917026172,,and Document No. 2009- 076131,
Official Records of the County of Sonoma, being more particularly described as
follows;
Commencing at a point on the existing right of way of the State of California as said
right of way is described'in'that Quitclaim Deed from J.L. Novak and Maria I. Novak to
the State of California; filed' October 7, 1953 in Book 1233 of Official Records at Page
381, Sonoma County Records; said point lying at .the westerly terminus of the course
recited as "N. 36 °25'29'` E., 864.07 feet "; thence from said Point of Commencement
along said existing right of way of the State of California North 37 0 19'06" East, for a
distance of 38.829 meters;
thence, leaving said existing right of way, North 74 °58'11" West, for a distance of
29.308 meters;
thence, along a tangent curve to the right, with a radius -of 187.400 meters, through a
central angle of 02 0 58'37 ", for a distance,of 9.737 meters;
thence, along a noni tangent ,curve to the right, from a tangent that bears, North
81 °18'34" West, with a radius of 60.960 meters, through 'a central angle of 21 °48'59 ",
for a distance of 23.212 meters;
thence, North 59 °29'34" West, for a distance of 12.701 meters;
thence, North 30 0 30'26" East,. for a distance of 3:046 meters to the Point of Beginning
of the parcel to be herein described;
thence from said' POINT OF BEGINNING, along a•curve10 the right, from a tangent
thatbears North 61 °06'38" West, with a radius of 184.352 meters, through a central
angle of 04 0 09'34 ", fora distance of 13.383 meters;
thence, North 56 0 57'04" West, fora distance of 75.375 meters;
thence, North 51 °28'17" West, for a, distance of 84.099 meters to a point on the
common'boundary of said lands of Novak, et al, and the lands of Syers Properties I,
L.P., as described in thatgrant deed filed. under Document No. 2002 135205, Official
Records of the County of Sonoma;
thence, along said common boundary, North 36 0 46'56" East, for a distance of 3.049
meters;
KlEng09109908410mV egals12421_Novak_SSMA.doc
8/1.7/10
2�
thence leaving said common boundary, South 51 °28'17" East, for a distance of 84.046
meters;
thence, South 56 °57'04" East, for a distance 75.229 meters;
thence, along a tangent curve to the left, with a radius of 181.304 meters, through a
central angle of 04 °11'12 for a distance of 13.248 meters;
thence, South 30 °30'26 " West, for a distance of 3.049 meters, to the Point of
Beginning. -
Containing 526 square meters (0.053 hectares), more or less.
Basis of bearings: California Coordinate System NAD 83, Zone 3. Divide the above
distances by. 0.999966886 to obtain ground distances.
Prepared by:
LAND-
BKF / Carlenzoli
Ralph H. Thomas, . No.
Lic. Exp. 9/30/11
Exp. 09/30111
Dated: 6 1
OF
KA EN0910990841DocslLegals12421 _Novak_SS &WA.doc
8117110
2CO
21
sa
sr
56
w
EXHIBIT 'B'
PARCEL 2 SYERS
N36'46'56 "E ON
3.049m PARCEL l
LANDS OF
PROPERTIES I, L.P.
2002- 135205
,5
N
(n l o g mAJ a �� I � J 75
:OD
Q
55
\
I
I
OD
` a
m
54
t t
E
OD CO
PARCEL 1
Ss
LANDS OF NOVAK, ET
AL
0
3 3
2767 O.R. 460
52
n
DN 1991 - 026172
5/
0 Ln
DN 2009 - 076131
0
r7
50
Ln
49
LO
x=4'09'34"
&- 4`11'12"
R- 184.352m
tN
R =
L= 13.3 8 3 m
L= 13.248
4B
N30'30'26 "E
'30'26 "W
3.046m
49 m
N59'29'34 "W
T AN. BRG.
12.71
POINT OF
A- 21 - 48',99"
BEGINNING
x= 2'58'37"
N 60.966m
21212m
k
R =187.400m
'18'34 "W
`
L= 9.737m
"W
TAN. BRG.
1474'58'11
�e
29.308m
E
M
a
0
0
Q
0
a
T
0
T
— — (N36'25'29 "E 8 84.07'— , PER 1233 Q.R. 381) — — — —
COMMENCEMENT E WASHINGTON ST
r lo ol " ,
100
METERS
S�
ROSS , CA 95401 SubJ'ect .SANITARY SEW '`dC�'EASEMENT
SANTA OSH
325 T R CIRCLE OV ER THE LANDS OF NOVAK
®® 2 f
B R F
PH: 707- 542 —.6465 Job No. 20099084
C A R L E N Z O L I FAX: 707 -542 -1645 By JAK Date MAR 2010 Chkd . RHT
ENGINEERS l SURVEYORS I PLANNERS SHEET OF -
2421 EXHB- Novok- SS- WLE.dwq
2�
w
Q
\
I
I
c
— — (N36'25'29 "E 8 84.07'— , PER 1233 Q.R. 381) — — — —
COMMENCEMENT E WASHINGTON ST
r lo ol " ,
100
METERS
S�
ROSS , CA 95401 SubJ'ect .SANITARY SEW '`dC�'EASEMENT
SANTA OSH
325 T R CIRCLE OV ER THE LANDS OF NOVAK
®® 2 f
B R F
PH: 707- 542 —.6465 Job No. 20099084
C A R L E N Z O L I FAX: 707 -542 -1645 By JAK Date MAR 2010 Chkd . RHT
ENGINEERS l SURVEYORS I PLANNERS SHEET OF -
2421 EXHB- Novok- SS- WLE.dwq
2�