SR-506-003-08 (27)
. - .. . .
. . 7-("
:7?J~oo 3 -t98 SEP 1 0 1985
GS:SES:CT
Counc1.1 Meeting: Septe~ber 10~ 1985 Santa Monlca, Callfornla
TO: Mayor and CIty CouncIl
FROM: City Staff
SUBJECT: Public Hear ~ng on Assessments of Costs to Repa~r Damaged
Sldewalks, Driveways and Curbs (SR-85-70)
IntroductIon
Th1S report requests the CIty Councll hold a public hearIng for the
assessment of costs to repaIr damaged s~dewalks, drlveways and curbs
at varl.OUS areas wlthln the C1tyv It IS recommended that Council
adopt the attached ResolutIon conflrming the assessment of costs.
I Background
I On August 13, 1985, the CIty Council set a publl.c hearing for
I September 10, 1985, on the assessment of costs to repaIr damaged
I
I sIdewalks, driveways and curbs w1thln the CIty of Santa Monlca.
,
i
I Letters were mal led ten days ln advance (August 30, 1985) to property
I owners Informing them of the publIC hearing 1.n accordance wIth the
I
I legal requIrements of Chapter 22 of the Improvement Act of 1911.
i
I Budge~/Flnanclal Impact
ThlS assessment dlstr1.ct w~ll generate revenues to the C1ty over the
, next two years In the amount of $2,523,,00. (Any unpaId assessments
I
wIll be placed on the 1986 property tax b~ll.)
I
I
:
I
I 7...c
,
I
SEP 10 1985
I
I
I
:: -GS:SES:ct ~ .ta Monlca,
CDunc~l Meetlng: tember 10, 1985 Callfornla
RecommendatIon
It 18 recommended the Clty Counc~l:
1.. Open the publlC hearIng;
2.. Close the publlC hearlng and acknowledge any protests; and
3~ Adopt the attached ResolutIon confIrming the assessments..
Prepared by: Stan Scholl, DIrector of General Servlces
Jean Stanley, Admlnlstratlve Analyst
Attachments: Resolut1.on for AdoptIon
Letter to Property Owners
Street SuperIntendent's Report
; CITY.F .
S A N TA M 0 N I C A
CALIFORNIA
NOfrCE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Re: SIdewalk Assessment Dlstrlct : SR-8S-70
The sIdewalk repalr at the above descr1bed property has been
completed, and the cost of the sldewal,< repa1r lS ~ . Your
cost 1S S , WhlCh lS one-half of the cost of the worK done
at the locatIon.
Pursuant to Streets and HIghways Code SectIon 5616, thIS letter 1.5
not1f1catlon tnat the Clty Councll, pursuant to ResolutIon No. 7067
adopted on August 13, 1985, has scheduled a nearlng to hear and pass
upon tne report of the Superlntendent of Streets of the cost of the
sIdewalK repalr, 10 connectlon wltn the aoove-descrlbed proJect,
together wItn any obJectIons and protests, lf any, wh1.ch may be ralsed
by any property owner llable to be assessed for the cost of SUCh
sIdewalk repa.lr and any other lnterested persons.
The hear Ing ~llll be held as follows:
DA'r E : September 10, 19135
PLACE: Cley Councll Cnambers
Clty Hall
1685 MalO Street
Santa MonIca, Callfornla
TI:1E: 7:30 P.M.
~ni protests or obJectlons must be In wrIt1ng and must be flIed wIth
toe Cltv Clerk on or before tne t un e set for the near Ing.
" .
Upon confirmation of the report of the Supcrl.ntendent of Street, as
provlded for 1.n Streets and H.lghways Code Sect~on 5618, the cost of
the sldewalK repalr wlll be assessed agalnst your property, and you
will be not1.fled of the manner of paymen t.
The C1.ty w.lll prov1de flnanclal asslst3.nCe for low-to-moderate InCOffie
persons~ If your .lncome 15 less than $16,150 for a famlly of one
person, $18,450 for tHO persons, $20,750 for three persons or $23,050
foe four persons, call Nancy i1cFar land 45d-8701 for lnformatlon on
tnls pro9ram~
Very truly yours,
/J~
Stanley E. Scholl
SuperIntendent of Streets
~ CITY.F .
S A N TA M 0 N I C A
CALIFORNIA
NOflCE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Re: S1.dewalk Assessment Dlstrlct : SR-85-70
The sidewalk repalr at the above descrlbed property has been
completed, and your cost of toe 51.dewalk repair 15 ~ ~
Pursuant to Streets and HIghways Code Section 5616, th1.s letter is
notlflcatlon that tne Clt.y Councll, pursuant to Resolution No~ 7067
adopted on August 13, 1985, has scheduled a hearIng to hear and pass
upon the report of the SuperIntendent of Streets of the cost of the
sIdewalk repalr, In connectlon wltn the above-dascrlbed proJect,
togetner wlth any obJe~tlons and protests, if any, WhlCh may be ralsed
by any property owner llable to be assessed for the cost of such
s1dewalk repdlr and any ot.har interested persons~
The hear1ng WIll be held as follows:
DATE: September 10,. 1985
PLACE: C1.ty CouncIl Chambers
Clty Hall
1685 Maln Street
Santa Moolca, CalIfornia
TIME: 7:30 P.M~
Any ?rot~sts or obJect1.ons must be 10 writIng and must be flIed wlth
toe Clti Clerk on or before trie tlme set for the hear lns.
Upon conf1.rmatlon of the report of the SuperIntendent of Street, as
prov~ded for 1n Streets and tll'3hwayS Code Section 5618, the cost of
the SIdewall{ repalr WIll be assessed aga1.nst your property, and you
w~lI be notIfIed of the manner of payment.
The CIty w1ll prOVIde flnanClal aSSIstance foe low-to-moderate Income
persons~ If your lncome is less than :;;16,150 for a famIly of one
person, $113,450 for two per sons I $20,750 for three persons or $23,050
for four persons, call Nancy t>1cFar I and 458-cs701 for Informat~on on
thlS program.
Very truly yours,
A~--
Stanley E. Scholl
SuperIntendent of Streets
. . .
.
STREET SUPERINTENDENT'S REPORT
REPAIR OF DAMAGED SIDE\iALKS, DRIVEWAYS, CURBS AND/OR REMOVAL
OF OBSTRUCTIONS, PERFORMED UNDER PROVISIONS OF DIVISION 7,
CHAPTER 22, SEC'TIONS 5600 TO 5630, OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS
CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA (8R-85-70)
Pursuant to the prov~slons of D~vision 7, Chapter 22, Sectlons
5600 of 5630, of the Streets and Hlghways Code of the State of
Callforn1a, the followlng work was caused to be done by the Street
Superlntendent:
The removal and replacement of 19 Ilneal feet of 8ldewalk at
$10 per llneal foot;
The removal and replacement of 645.50 square fee t of sldewalk
at $4 per Ilneal foot;
The removal and replacement of 30 11.neal feet of PC concrete
at $2 per lIneal foot; and
The removal of 100 square feet of PC concrete of sldewalk at
$3 per square foot~
The total cost of the above work was $3,132~OO
The total proposed assesment for the above sldewalk and curb
damage 18 $1,566~OO or 50 percent of the total cost. Tne otner 50
percent of the cost lS belng pald by the Clty as the above repalrs
were caused by tree root damage.
The removal of 30 square feet of concrete at $2 per square
footi and
The removal and replacement of 3 Ilneal feet of PC concrete
curb at $10 per Ilneal foot;
The removal and replacement of 48 square feet of PC concrete
on sldewalks at $4 per square foot; and
The removal and replacement of 135 square feet of PC concrete
on drIveways at $5 per square foot.
. . .
The total proposed assessment for s1.dewalks and curbs 1S
$957.00 or 100 percent of the total cost as the damage was not related
to to tree roots.
Reference lS made to the attached sheets for a descrlptlon of
the real property ln front of which the work has been done, the
proposed assessment against each property, and a descrlption of the
work done ln front of each property.
;4~ t.Jvl~
Street Superlnt ndent
ft,' ~
. I
FlIed wlth the Clty Clerk thlS ,0' day of .-/~, ~f .~, 1985.
, .
,.-. ( A Ii
./ /~--~~
(:-~,
Clty ClerK
. . .
SR-85-70
SIrE ADDRESS DESCRIPTIO~ OF WORK
PROPERTY OWNER & ASSESSMENT DONE
Ruth J. Carver 1402 Maple Stw Remove and replace 3
1226 Vlctorla Avenue Lot 1, lineal feet of curb.
Venlce, CA Tract 11645
9U291 $15.00
Danlel A. Dye 1714 Sunset Ave... Remove and replace 40
Mary E. Dye Lot 407, square feet of sldewalk.
1714 Sunset Avenue Tract 09833 Remove and replace 4
Santa Monlca, CA $100.00 llneal feet of curb...
90405
Walter fl. Flscher 829 Maple St. Remove 30 square feet of
829 Maple Street Lot 45, PC concrete parkway.
Santa Monica, CA Tract 2360
90405 $30.00
Robert J" Graney, Sr... 1420 Maple St. Remove and replace 50
R. J. Graney, Jr.. Lot 7,8 square feet of sldewalk"
8815 Salmon Avenue Tract A.A.
Fountain Valley, CA Montano's
92780 Subdlvlslon
$100.00
Howard GUllford 1201 Grant St... Remove and replace 38
1201 Grant Street Lot 20, square feet of sidewalk"
Santa Monlca, CA Tract 12b55 Remove and replace 12
90405 $136..00 feet of curb.
Leo Kenneally 860 P1CO Blvd. Remove and replace 107,,5
2700 s. Figueroa St. Lot 14, square feet of sldewalk.
Los Angeles, CA Tract 5512 Remove and replace 135
90007 $890.00 square feet of driveway.
Jaroslaw vL Komorowsky 833 Pearl St. Remove and replace 50
833 Pearl Street Lot 160, square feet of sidewalk..
Santa Monlca, CA Tract 5512
90405 $100,,00
Eugene P... Link 1205 Grant St" Remove and replace 50
Sue Wong Lot 21, square feet of sldewalk.
1205 Grant Street Tract 12655
Santa MonIca, CA $100,,00
90405
Gladys McCarter 1211 Grant St. Remove and replace 75
1211 Grant Street Lot 22, square feet of sIdewalk"
Santa Mon1ca, CA Tract 12055
90405 $150.00
Jack O'Brlen 2627 11th St" Remove and replace 100
ElaIne O'BrIen Lot 3, square feet of sIdewalk...
2627 11th Street Tract 5217
Santa Monica, CA $150.00
90403
. . .
Don Shawver 1221 Grant St. Remove and replace 25
1221 Grant Street Lot 24, square feet of s~dewalk.
Santa Monica, CA 'fract 12655
90403 $50.00
Thomas B. Sm1.th 1418 Maple Stw Remove and replace 25
2232 Estr1.bo Lot 9 square feet of sidewalk.
Rolllng Hills, CA 'fract AwAw
90274 Montano's
Subdl.v~SlOn
$50.00
Carl Stockman 2222 16th St. Remove and replace 40
2222 16th Street Lot 1, square feet of sidewalk.
Santa Monica, CA Block 1,
90405 Tract 12581
$80wOO
William Tocher 1703 Maple St.. Remove and replace 45
Catherlne Tocher Lot 17, square feet of Sldewalkw
1703 Maple Street Block C,
Santa Monlca, CA Tract 12401
90405 $90.00
Joe Weisshaar 833 Maple St. Remove and replace 48
833 Maple St. Lot 44, square feet of sldewalk.
Santa Monlca,CA Tract 2360 Remove 30 square feet
90405 $282..00 of PC concrete parkway.
Remove and replace 3
Ilneal feet of curb.
Charles Zl11nsky 1002 P1CO Blvd. Remove and replace 100
Mlchael Crowl Lo t 15, square feet of sidewalk.
1002 P1CO Boulevard Tract 5512
Santa Monlca, CA $200.00
904Ll5
Total Assessments: $2,523.00
~ --=:.. ~ . t . \
'< _~-,.:- ~~ }~~r'_ ~
~EFORE DISTRIBUTION CHECK CONTENT OF ALL FOR CITY _C~ERKtS ACTION
DISTRIBUTION OF RESOLUTION #I 700 S- ORDINANCE #I
Council Meeting Date ~~//S- Introduced:
tt'l Agenda Item # 7-~ Adopted:
'X) AIWAYS PUBLISH AI:X)PJ.:W ORD~*
..... Was it amended? IY~ *Cross out Attorney's approval
::>
"'I
..... VOTE: Affirmative: S--o
::71
en Negative:
G) Abstain~
u Absent: f;;,_pr
s::
cIS ~ PROOF VOTE~ WITH ANOTHER/PERSON BEFORE ANVTHING
s::
f"l ui~lK!~uTi0N: uKiGiNAL ~o be slgnedt se~1ed and filed in Vault.
1j
1-0
0 NEWSPAPER PUBLICATION (Date: )
0
> Department originating staff report ( )
f"l
0
u Management Ser~i~e~~~ynne Ba~rette .0rdinances only ~
1IJ
"" ' - .
+oJ, r+gency mentioned in document or staff report
0'
s:: .~ .... . (certifie;d?)
>- ~?..... ~
0 Subject file (agenda packet) 1
t::
1-4 .
0 Counter file
+oJ 1
+J
0.( r
+J Others-:
as . -
d Airport Parking Auth. .
+J
'd Auditorum - Personnel
Q) , -
+oJ
tI)
4) Building Qept. Planning \
::s
c-
o Environ. Servo Police (en-
I-<
0 forcement ?)
u Finance
... Purchasing .
.j.4
... Fire _
0 Recr/Parks
II) General Servo (
.
>- Transportation
4)
s:: L1brary
I-< Treasurer
0
+oJ Manager
+oJ
<(
>. SEND FOUR'COPIES OF" ALL ORDINANCES" TO: - *Check COde Sections before sending.
+oJ
" - CODFD SYSTEMS, Attn peterMaci-earie
u 120 ~ain,r.tr~et ~
~ _ Avo;'t ,Nezw' Jersey _ 01717 .
0
~ SEND F0.UR COPIES OF Al.l. ORnTNANrF5- ,.:to:
+oJ PRESIDING JUDGE
f.< SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL COURT
Cl,) '5
.0 ~. 725 MAIN S TREBT
0 TOTAL COPIES
c::: SANTA MON~CA, CA 90401 1 ____ I
'"
.~- ~-----~.......~ -- - - --..-- .. - --- - -......
- - ....._~-~ -- -- .. - " - - .............--.............----..---....- -- -- -
. , . . .
RESOLUTION NO.. 708S(CCS)
(CITY COUNCIL SERIES)
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA
MONICA CONFIRMING THE REPORT OF THE SUPERINTENDENT
OF STREETS REGARDING REPA!RS TO DAMAGED SIDEWALKS,
DRIVEWAYS AND CURBS (SR-85-70)
WHEREAS, the Street Superintendent of the City of Santa
Monica, pursuant to Section 5600 to 5630 of the Streets and Highways
Code, commenced proceedings to cause the repair of damaged sidewalks,
driveways and curbs in the City of Santa Monica at lZ05 Grant St..,
1002 Pico Blvd., 833 Pearl St.., 829 Maple St.., 1221 Grant St.., 1201
Gran t S t.. , 1714 Sunset Ave.., 1703 Maple St., 1420 Maple St.., 141-8
Maple St., 1402 Maple St., 2627 11th St., 2222 16th St.., 1211 Grant
St. , 860 P1CO Blvd., 833 Maple St., and
WHEREAS, sixty days after said order was served, the work had
not been completed by the owners or persons in possession of the
affected properties, and the Superintendent of Streets caused the worK
to be done; and
WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Streets gave the notice
required by Section 5616 of the Streets and Highways Code; and
WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Streets dld file with the City
Counell of the City of Santa Monica his report of repairs and cost as
required by Section 5617 of the Streets and Highways Code; and
WHEREAS, upon the day and hour fixed for hearing by Resolution
Number 7067 (CCS) , the City Council of the City of Santa Monica heard
and passed upon the report of the Superintendent of Streets together
with all objectlons and protests as required by Section 5618 of the
Streets and H1ghways Code;
.
.
. < . .
NOW, THEREFORE, TriE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I.. The report of the Superintendent of Streets
heretofore filed and above-described be and the same is hereby
confirmed...
SECTION 2.. All protests and objections of every kind and
nature to the report of the Superintendent of Streets be and the same
are hereby overruled and denied.
SECTION 3w The cost of the repairs, as set forth in the
report of the Superintendent of Streets, shall be assessed against the
propert~es therein described, which properties front upon the sidewalk
upon which the repairs were made..
SECTION 4. If such assessment is not paid within the time
permitted by law, the same shall constitute a special assessment
against and lien on the properties therein described, in the amount
set forth in the report of the Superintendent of Streets, which lien
shall continue until the assessment and all interest thereon is paid
or until ~t is discharged of record..
SECTION 5. If the assessment is not paid within the time
permitted by law, the Superintendent of Streets, in accordance with
Section 5628 of the Streets and H~ghways Code, shall deliver a Notice
of Lien, prepared in the manner required by Section 5626 of the
Streets and Highways Code, to the County Auditor who shall collect the
assessment together with all other taxes aga1nst the property.
- .
.' . . .
,
SECTION 6.. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoptl.on of
this resolution and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in
full force and effect..
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
~ ............ '-------
0 ~
City Attorney
.
.. . ,oi - . .
.
Adopted and approved this 10th day of September, 1985.
~~ k.~_
/ Mayor
I hereby certify that the forego1ng Resolution No. 7085(CCS)
was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Monica
at a meeting thereof held on September 10, 1985 by the following
Council vote:
Ayes: Councilmember-s: Conn, Epstein, Jennings, Zane and
Mayor Reed
Noes: Councilmembers: None
Abstain: Councilmembers: None
Absent: Councilmembers: Katz
ATTEST:
~~
City Clerk
.
.' . . ~~T
. ~
TRANSCRIPT OF 7-C ~ 1-C
C(-((? --ft~'
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF
SEPTEMBER 10, 1985
MR. HOWARD GUILF9RD, 1201 GRA~T SJREET r SANTA MONICA.:
I have three points of concern about these trees. In the first
place, I understand that they are a type of ficus tree and they
have raised the sidewalk up and down that street and several
other streets in the City. I think that the choice of the trees
was a lousy choIce in the first place. However, that is no issue
with this Council. Someone else back down the line made that
error and I don't know what we can do about that. But I also
feel that the City collects a gas tax for the maintenance of the
streets and the sidewalks and I think that the funds for the re-
paIr of the SIdewalks should come out of that tax. I am sure
that If the Clty pays half of it, then that part of It probably
comes out of that tax. But I st1ll think that it is doulble dip-
ping if you take the tax of the gas tax for the malntenance of
the streets and the sidewalks and then turn around and charge the
property owners for that. The third issue is that this is the
third time that this sidewalk has been replaced in front of my
place since I have lived there. The other two times I spoke to
the people who were dOIng it and I asked them if they could do
something about getting the roots out of there. I am famlliar
with some of the means of doing that and it has been a custom ln
other clties to go through with a saw and cut the roots out. Now
- 1 -
,,> ~" . .
4
I see that the City of Santa Monica has that equipment. But when
they came through my neighborhood just prior to replacing the
sldewalk they didn't cut the roots on my tree. I had quite a
length of sidewalk there and the price that was quoted to me f I
wouldn't replace that sidewalk myself for the total price. But I
still think that the City 1s in error and it is a gross ex-
travagance if they keep repairing those sidewalks that way with-
out doing something about correcting the problem. The two t1mes
before I was still working, but now I am retired now and I'm con-
cerned about some of these couple of hundred of dollars that it
is going to cost me to repair the sidewalk.
REED: Well, let me ask you a question about the previous re-
pairs. Is this current repair the same linear footage that was
previously repaired or is it some different section of the
sidewalk.
HR. GUILFORD: It 1S the same tree and, yes, the previous repairs
are still maybe three or four feet that 1S still there, one of
the previous repairs. Now the repair has gone further on down
the walk the other way.
REED: So It Isntt the exact same stretch of cement.
HR. GUILFORD: Oh yes, it is the same tree. It is the same sec-
tion of walk.
EPSTEIN: But it is not the same stretch of
CONN: Your not repairing the same particular slab of sidewalk.
- 2 -
~ .-.: . .
~ ,
MR. GUILFORD: Oh yes, they tore up the original repairs when
they dId thIS. All, but like I said, one section.
REED: You may be home free. We have a policy that you only pay
once and then after that we pay. Once per square of sidewalk. I
mean you would pay to replace it once. After that we pay to re-
place It. So we may have to have the staff recheck the data on
your particular situation on Grant Street and that means we wIll
have to postpone this Item. Right Mr. JaIili.
JALILI: I think you could direct staff to check it out and con-
firm that, in which case it will be removed.
REED: What? Confirm the assessments and hold Mr. GUIlford's
subject to the staff verifying that if the work has been done
previously by the City, in which case he will not be assessed,
and if we determlne that the work on that particular part of the
sidewalk has not been done before, he will be assessed.
HR. JALILI: That's correct.
REED: You understand the sltuatlon, Mr. GUl1ford?
MR. GUILFORD: Yes, thank you.
REED: Then, you ought to take photographs every time you do this
so you will have records in the future.
To GJ 10 'i'S
- 3 -