HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 02271996 - D4 .�- D.4
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on February 27, 1996 by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Rogers, Bishop, DeSaulnier, Torlakson, Smith
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Condemnation of Property, Hwy 4 at Vintage Parkway -
Oakley Area
On this date the Board of Supervisors considered the adoption of a
Resolution of Necessity for Condemnation of Property for Public
Road and Signal Installation Purposes: Hwy 4 at Vintage Parkway -
Oakley Area.
Paul Gavey, Public Works Department presented the staff report.
The following person appeared and presented testimony;
Walter L. Rippee, 3025 O'Hara Ave. , Brentwood
Following Board discussion, IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that
Resolution 96/88 is ADOPTED; and staff is URGED to meet with Mr.
Rippee to address his concerns.
I hereby certify that this is a true
and correct copy of an action taken and
entered on the minutes of the Board of
Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: February 27, 1996
PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk of the Board
of Supervisors and County Administrator
By ' Deputy
cc: Public Works Department
Real Property Division
Auditor-Controller
County Counsel
County Administrator
=- D4
1 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
2
3
4 Re: Condemnation of Property for Public RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY
Road and Signal Installation No. 96/88
5 Purposes: Hwy 4 at Vintage (C.C.P. Sec. 1245.230)
Parkway - Oakley Area
6
7 The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, California, by vote of two-thirds or
8 more of its members, RESOLVES THAT:
9 Pursuant to Government Code Section 25350.5 and Streets and Highways Code
10 Section 943, Contra Costa County intends to construct a public improvement to install a traffic
11 signal, improve the intersection of Highway 4 and Vintage Parkway in the Oakley area and
12 make related improvements and, in connection therewith, acquire certain interests in real
13 property.
14 The property to be acquired consists of four(4) parcels and is generally located in the
15 Oakley area. The said property is more particularly described in Appendix "A", attached
16 hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
17 On February 8, 1996,notice of the County's intention to adopt a resolution of necessity
18 for acquisition by eminent domain of the real property described in Appendix "A" was sent to
19 persons whose names appear on the last equalized County Assessment Roll as owners of
20 said property. The notice specified Tuesday, February 27, 1996 at 2:00 p.m. in the Board of
21 Supervisors Chambers in the Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, California,
22 as the time and place for the hearing thereon.
23 The hearing was held at that time and place, and all interested parties were given an
24 opportunity to be heard. Based upon the evidence presented to it, this Board finds,
25 determines and hereby declares the following:
26 1. The public interest and necessity require the proposed project; and
27 2. The proposed project is planned and located in the manner which will be most
28 1
1 compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury; and
2 3. The property described herein is necessary for the proposed project; and
3 4. The offer required by Section 7267.2 of the Government Code was made to the
4 owner or owners of record.
5 The County Counsel of this County is hereby AUTHORIZED and EMPOWERED:
6 To acquire in the County's name, by condemnation, the titles, easements and rights of
7 way hereinafter described in and to said real property or interest(s)therein, in accordance with
8 the provisions for eminent domain in the Code of Civil Procedure and the Constitution of
9 California:
10 Parcel 1 is to be acquired in fee title.
11 Parcels 2 and 4 are to be acquired as permanent highway easements.
12 Parcel 5 is to be acquired as a permanent public utility easement.
13 To prepare and prosecute in the County's name such proceedings in the proper court
14 as are necessary for such acquisition;
15 To deposit the probable amount of compensation, based on an appraisal, and to apply
16 to said court for an order permitting the County to take possession and use said real property
17 for said public uses and purposes.
18 PASSED and ADOPTED on February 27, 1996, by the following vote:
19 AYES: Supervisors Bishop, Smith, DeSaulnier, Torlakson and Rogers
20 NOES: None
21 ABSENT: None
22 ABSTAIN: None
23 ffl
24 N
25 N
26 X
27 N
28 2
1 1 HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly and regularly introduced,
2 passed and adopted by the vote of two-thirds or more of the Board of supervisors of the
3 Contra Costa County, California, at a meeting of said Board on the date indicated above.
4 Dated: February 27, 1996
5 Phil Batchelor, Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors and County Administrator
6
7
By:
8 DeputV
9
10
11
12 cc: Public Works Department
Real Property Division
13 Auditor-Controller
County Counsel (certified copy)
14 County Administrator
15
16 HADFOTPSRIEFSISLA\LGHT-RES.MD
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 3
D.q
04-CC-4 33.5
State Parcel No. 52900
State Highway 4
Vicinity of Vintage Parkway
PARCEL 1 - Rippee
APPENDIX "A"
PARCEL 1: (Fee Title)
Real property in an unincorporated area of Contra Costa County, California, being a
portion of the southeast one-quarter of Section 23, Township 2 North, Range 2 East,
Mount Diablo Meridian, described as follows:
Commencing at a point on the south line of said Section 23 (T.2N., R.2E., M.D.M.), said
point lying south 89007'02" east 1,273.60 feet from the south quarter corner of said
Section 23, at the intersection with the southerly prolongation of the west line of the parcel
of land described in the instrument to Walter Leo Rippee and Sylvia R. Rippee, trustees
of the Rippee 1990 Trust, dated August 3, 1990, and recorded August 13, 1990, in Book
16047 of Official Records at page 551, records of said County; thence northerly along said
southerly prolongation of the west line of said Rippee parcel, north 0052'58" east 30.00
feet to a point which lies on the north right of way line of State Highway 4, said point being
the Point of Beginning; thence, from the Point of Beginning, along the west line of said
Rippee parcel, north 0°52'58" east 43.28 feet; thence, leaving said west line south
43032'30" east 38.19 feet to a point on a line which is parallel with and 46.00 feet north of
the south line of said Section 23; thence, along said parallel line, south 89007'02" east
73.26 feet to a point on the east line of said Rippee parcel (16047 O.R. 551); thence, along
said east line south 0052'58" west 16.00 feet to a point on the north right of way line of
said State Highway 4; thence, along said north right of way line, north 89007'02" west
99.99 feet to the Point of Beginning.
Containing an area of 1,964 square feet of land, more or less.
Bearings and distances are based on the California Coordinate System Zone III (CCS27).
To obtain ground distances, multiply given distances by 1.0000601.
This real property description has been prepared by me or under my direction, in
conformance with the Professional Land Surveyors Act.
Signature-
License
ZWEIy�o�
License and Surveyor
Contra Costa County Public Works UP.
tNa 5999
Date: /Z-
JH:kd
g:\Clerical\Exhibits\Rippee.Exh Pagel of 4
10/10/95
V•1
04-CC-4 33.5
State Parcel No. 52900
State Highway 4
Vicinity of Vintage Parkway
PARCEL 2 - United Centro Properties
PARCEL 2: (Highway Easement)
Real property in an unincorporated area of Contra Costa County, California, being a portion of the
southeast one-quarter of Section 23, Township 2 North, Range 2 East, Mount Diablo Meridian,
described as follows:
Commencing at a point on the south line of said Section 23 (T.2N,R.2E.,M.D.M.), said point lying
south 89°07'06" east 1,373.59 feet from the south quarter corner of said Section 23, at the
intersection with the southerly prolongation of the west line of the parcel of land described as Parcel
Three in the deed to United Centro Properties, recorded December 18, 1987, in Book 14079 of.
Official Records, at page 786, records of said County; thence northerly along said southerly
prolongation of the west line of said Parcel Three, north 0°52'58" east 30.00 feet to a point which
lies on the north right of way line of State Highway 4, said point being the Point of Beginning;
thence, from the Point of Beginning, along the west line of said Parcel Three, north 0°52'58" east
16.00 feet to a point on a line which is parallel with and 46.00 feet north of the south line of said
Section 23; thence, leaving the west line of Parcel Three, along said parallel line, south 89'07'02"
east 113.59 feet;thence, leaving last said line, south 84°.23'26" east 94.73 feet to a point on the east
line of said Parcel Three (14079 O.R. 786); thence, along the east line of Parcel Three, south
0°52'58" west 8.19 feet to a point on the north right of way line of State Highway 4;thence, along
said north right of way line, north 89°07'02" west 208.00 feet to the Point of Beginning.
Containing an area of 2,959 square feet of land,more or less.
Bearings and,distance are based on the California Coordinate System Zone III (CCS27). To obtain
ground distances, multiply given distances by 1.0000601.
This real property description has been prepared by me or under my direction, in conformance with
the Professional Land Surveyors Act.
Signature: ,�`�
Licensed Land Surveyor qp
Contra Costa County Public Works EVL
Date: Z ! �7� No.59N
OF
�P
JH:jlg
g:\Clerical\Exhibits\Vintage.Exh Page 2 of 4
1/24/96
04-CC-4 33.5
State Parcel No. 52900
State Highway 4
Vicinity of Vintage Parkway
PARCELS 4 and 5 - Rodrigues
Real property in an unincorporated area of Contra Costa County, California, being a portion of the
northeast one-quarter of Section 26, Township 2 North, Range 2 East, Mount Diablo Meridian,
described as follows:
PARCEL 4: (Highway Easement)
Commencing at a point on the north line of said Section 26 (T.2N., R.2E., M.D.M.), said point lying
north 89007'02" west 1,350.87 feet from the northeast corner of said Section 26, at the northerly
prolongation of the west line of the parcel of land described in the deed to Harold Wilfred Rodrigues
and Barbara Jean Rodrigues, as Trustees of the Rodrigues Revocable Inter Vivos Trust, dated
January 21, 1991, and recorded August 20, 1993, in Book 18863 of Official Records at page 942,
records of said County; thence, southerly along the northerly prolongation of the west line of said
Rodrigues parcel, south 0°52'58" west 33.00 feet to a point on the south right of way line of State
Highway 4, said point being the Point of Beginning; thence, from the Point of Beginning, along the
south right of way line of said. State Highway 4, south 89007'02" east 563.89 feet; thence leaving
last said line, south 0052'58"west 0.57 feet; thence south 89021'27" west 467.25 feet to a point on
a line which is parallel with and 46.00 feet southerly of the north line of said Section 26 (T.2N.,
R.2E., M.D.M.); thence, along said parallel line, north 89007'02" west 96.81 feet to a point on the
west line of said Rodrigues parcel (18863 O.R. 942), said point shall hereinafter be referred to as
Point A; thence, along the west line of said Rodrigues parcel, north 005258" east 13.00 feet to the
Point of Beginning.
Containing an area of 4,430 square feet of land, more or less.
PARCEL 5: (Public Utility Easement)
An Easement for utility purposes with the right from time to time to construct, place, inspect,
maintain, replace and remove communication and electric facilities consisting of aerial and
underground wires, cables and other electric conductors with associated poles, crossarms,
anchors, guys, fixtures, conduits, manholes, service boxes, marker posts and other appurtenances,
together with a right of way therefore and the right of ingress thereto and egress therefrom, across,
upon, in and under the following described real property:
Beginning at Point A as described in PARCEL 4 above; thence, from the Point of Beginning, along
the southerly boundary of said PARCEL 4, south 89°07'02"east 96.81 feet, thence north 89°21'27"
east 467.25 feet; thence, leaving the southerly boundary of said PARCEL 4, north 0052'58" east
0.57 feet to a point on a line which is parallel with and 33.00 feet southerly of the north line of said
T_ . . , r
D-4
Section 26 (T.2N., R.2E., M.D.M.); thence, along said parallel line, south 89007'02" east 5.00 feet;
thence, leaving last said line, south 0052'58" west 5.44 feet; thence south 89°21'27" west 472.17
feet to a point on a line which is parallel with and 51.00 feet southerly of the north line of said
Section 26; thence, along said parallel line, north 89007'02"west 96.89 feet to a point on the west
line of said Rodrigues parcel (18863 O.R. 942); thence, along said west line, north 0°52'58" east
5.00 feet to the Point of Beginning.
Containing an area of 2,849 square feet of land, more or less.
Bearings and distances are based on the California Coordinate System Zone III (CCS27). To
obtain ground distances, multiply given distance by 1.0000601.
These real property descriptions have been prepared by me or under my direction, in conformance
with the Professional Land Surveyors Act.
lANO ��
Signature: ZW
Licensed Land Surveyor
Contra Costa County Public Works
ka 5999
Date: — —26 Q
JH:kd
g:C1erica1\Exhibits\Rodrig.SH4
2/7/96
Page 4 of 4
D.
LAW OFFICES OF
HE111'1AN H. 1 11ZGE11AID 345 LO RTAVENUE, SUITE 302
BURLING GAM E, CALIFORNIA 94010
TELEPHONE (415( 348-5195
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION FACSIMILE (415) 348-3518
HERMAN H. FITZGERALD
CHRISTINE C. FITZGERALD
RECEIVED
February 16, 1996 FEB 2 01996
By Certified Mail
CUM BOARD OF SUPERVI M
County of Contra Costa CONMCOSTACO'
651 Pine Street
Martinez, CA 94553
Attn: Board of Supervisors
Re: Property Acquisition - Hwy 4/Vintage Parkway -
Rippee Property
Resolution of Necessity for Acquisition
of Property by Eminent Domain
To The Honorable Board of Supervisors:
This Board has on its agenda for February 27 , '1996, a hearing
to consider adoption of a Resolution of Necessity for the
acquisition of the above-entitled property by eminent domain.
This office is submitting this letter on behalf of Walter L.
Rippee and Sylvia Rippee, the owners of the property in question,
to object to the Board' s proposed action on several grounds ,
including (1) the failure to make a proper offer for the property
as required by Government Code Section 7267 . 2 ; (2) that adoption
of the resolution would be in violation of law because the Countv
has failed to comply with applicable statutory procedures which
are prerequisites to such a resolution, including the .redsirements
of the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA" ) ; and (3 ) the
1 ;-. l� ^y h as ^r;�ti t'e� Tii^y')-, i c-al C.,IM ar,> Ct.�'..t_T'
:rte a.n _:.e - -a *'Z__ . -.
required by Government Code Section 7267 .2 ; and (4) the failure to
conform to procedural requirements ; and (5) that the proposed
condemnation action is a continuation of a series of unlawful
actions on the part of the County to obstruct the owner ' s
legitimate attempts to preserve the agricultural use of the
property; (6) the violation of the Eminent Domain Law, statutory
and decisional .
1) THE COUNTY MAY NOT ADOPT A RE SOLUTION OF'
NECESSITY BECAUSE IT H;S FAILED TO
COMPLY WITH STATUTORY PROCEDURES.
Sections 1245.230 et. seq. of the Code of Civil Procedure and
Government Code Sections ';267 . 1 and '7267 . 2 set forth the
procedures that must be fc-ilowed prior to adoption of a resolution
of necessity by a public ent.ir.y. The County has failed to follow
9PLAialg, LA.) Dy
February 16, 1996
Page 2
those procedures.
Under Government Code Section 7267 . 2 , prior to adopting a
resolution of necessity, the condemnor must make an offer to
acquire the property, which must contain a written statement of,
and summary of the basis for, the amount it has established as
just compensation. The County failed to provide an adequate
"Appraisal Summary Statement" , which was required to accompany the
Notice of Intention, thus the County did not meet the requirements
of a bona fide offer under Government Code Section 7267 .2 .
Recent case law has made it clear that the provisions of
Section 7267 . 2 "are not merely discretionary guidelines , but
mandatory requirements which must be observed by any public entity
planning to initiate eminent domain proceedings through a
resolution of necessity. " City of San Jose v. Great Oaks Water
Co . , 192 Cal .App. 3d 1005, 237 Cal .Rptr. 845, 849 (Cal . Ct . App.
1987) . Adoption of the proposed resolution is therefore premature
until the County complies with these requirements .
Finally, the County has not made specific findings as
required by law to establish the necessity of eminent domain
proceedings, that the property in question is necessary for the
proposed project, and that the project is planned or located in a
manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good
and least private injury. Nor is there any credible evidence to
support such conclusions .
The County' s actions in proceeding. to consider the proposed
resolution without complying with these mandatory requirements,
among others, reveals that the true intent behind this proposed
action is to prevent the intended use of the property. so that the
c prn rt�r i rite - t - the
ov�TM:er .ill be compelled to c�r:Te� � L ne_ -.1 _ _� _o
County.
2) THE COUNTY CANNOT ADOPT THE RESOLUTION UNTIL
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CEQA HAVE BEEN MET.
Similarly, the proposed resolution cannot validly be adopted
until all of the requirements of CEQA and the State CEQA
Guidelines have been met. California courts have established. that
public acquisition of property is a "project" within the meaning
of CEQA, and therefore subject to all the requirements of CEQA and
the State CEQA Guidelines . Nevertheless, the County has not
fulfilled the requirements of CEQA. Accordingly, if the proposed
resolution is adopted, the County will be in clear violation of
CEQA, as well as other provisions of law.
February 16, 1996
Page 3
The legislative committee comment to Code of Civil Procedure
Section 1240 . 030 provides in pertinent part as follows:
"Subdivision (a) [of the statute] prevents the taking of
the property by eminent domain unless the public
interest and necessity require the project . ` Public
interest and necessity' include all aspects of the
public good including but not limited to social ,
.economic , environmental and aesthetic considerations
The San Jose, supra, case stated further at page 1017 as
follows :
"We conclude that the City violated CEQA by failing to
make a determination whether a subsequent or
supplemental EIR was required by the redesign of the
project, or whether an addendum to the final EIR would
suffice. There should be an opportunity for public
hearings and comments prior to this determination. If
at that time it does appear that the changes in the
project design are sufficiently substantial to require
revisions of the EIR - as appears to be the case from
the evidence in the record - then a subsequent or
supplemental EIR will be required. "
The County has failed to comply with the requirements of CEQA
and has not addressed the significant effects on the environment
which may be caused by County's proposed project.
Adoption of the proposed resolution is therefore premature
until the County complies with these requirements .
3) THE COUNTY ' S FAILURE TO SATISFY PUBLIC
INTEREST AND NECESSITY AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS
OF THE EMINENT DOMAIN LAW PRECLUDES THE
ADOPTION OF THE RESOLUTION
1 . The proposed project is not planned or
located in a manner that will be the most
compatible with the greatest public good and
least private injury. The County has not
properly or adequately evaluated or considered
the private injury which will occur to the
owner of the property interests from the
project, and has not weighed or balanced other
alternatives which would lessen the private
injury while permitting the proposed project.
p.q
February 16, 1996
Page 4
2 . The acquisition of the property interests
as proposed is not necessary for the project.
3 . The vote by the Board in deciding whether
to adopt the Resolution of Necessity will be
affected by a conflict of interest or other
improper influence.
4 . The proposed acquisition will not be used
for the stated purpose within the time period
required by law.
5 . The proposed taking is of excess property
not authorized by law.
6 . The proposed taking is for a use not
authorized by law.
7 . The condemnor lacks the power to take the
affected property interests by eminent domain.
8 . The proposed acquisition is not for a
public use.
9 . The County is not authorized to acquire
the property interests for the stated use.
10 . The property interests being acquired,
and the totality thereof, are not necessary
for the project.
11 . Portions of the proposed taking are
already devoted to an existing public use, and
the proposed project and takings are not a
more necessary public use.
4 . CONCLUSION
The owners of the property being acquired and damaged, object
to the Resolution and requests that these objections be made part
of the administrative record of the Hearing and also re-affirm
their request for an opportunity to appear and be heard at the
Resolution hearing.
For the above reasons, it is respectfully submitted that the
. VA
February 16, 1996
Page 5
resolution should not be passed.
Very truly yours,
HEiTZGERALD
HHF:ccd
02/27/1996 12:4.7, FROM ATHERTON & DOZIER TO 15106461059 P.01
UNITED CENTRO PROPERTIES
2156 West Alpine Ave. • Stockton,CA 95204-2853
TO: CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: UNITED CENTRO PROPERTIES
DATE: FEBRUARY 27, 1996
RE: FEBRUARY 27, 1996 BOARD MEETING; ITEM SCHEDULED FOR 2
P.M. REGARDING WIDENING OF HIGHWAY 4 IN OAKLEY
BY FAX TO 646-1059
Dear Clerk:
Please see that the accompanying letter makes it to Supervisor Torlakson and is
made part of the record for today's meeting. Thank you for very much.
UNITED CENTRO PROPERTIES
UNITED CENTRO PROPERTIES
2156 West Alpine Ave. • Stockton,CA 95204.2853
February 27, 1996
Supervisor Tom Torlakson
Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
300 E. Leland Rd., Suite 100
Pittsburg CA 94565
Re: Resolution of Necessity for Taking of Property in Oakley for
Widening of Highway 4 and Downtown Oakley Specific Plan
February 27, 1996 meeting; item scheduled for 2:00 p.m,
Dear Supervisor Torlakson:
As owner of the Oakley Plaza Shopping Center at the corner of Highway 4 and
the Vintage Parkway, United Centro Properties would like to bring to your attention the
severe impact that the proposed changes to Highway 4 will have upon United Centro
and its tenants. The possible plans for Highway 4 mainly consist of three proposals,
one of which is the widening of Highway 4 and another being the creation of a "bypass"
for westbound Highway 4 traffic through United Centro's property. United Centro
formerly believed that the County would adopt one or the other proposal. Now,
however, the Public Works Department pians to widen Highway 4 and this comes on for
a resolution of necessity at today's meeting at 2:00 p.m. If this resolution is adopted,
then United Centro would prefer that it be to the exclusion of the Redevelopment
Agency's potential plans for the creation of a "bypass." To do both, that is to both widen
Highway 4, and then to create a bypass would have an utterly devastating effect on the
property and its tenants and businesses. We thus ask that the Board (which also acts
as the Redevelopment Agency in Oakley) consider that any intention to widen Highway
4 reflect a decision to not adopt any proposed bypass in addition to the widening. We
would also like to request that some examination be made to determine whether it is
really necessary to widen Highway 4 at all, or can other steps be taken in the current
right-of-way area to improve traffic flow. We believe that there must be some way to
improve the roadway such that no further takings need be made.
We also request that this letter be made part of the public record for the February
27 meeting. Thank you for considering this.real problem for the land and business
owners in your area. _
" nderely,
for UNI;WC9&"TROP/RoPERTIES
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
DATE: February 23, 1996
TO: Board of Supervisors
J7�1lcl
FROM: J. Micha�alford, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Report Re: State Hwy 4/Vintage Parkway Signal Project - Oakley Area
Pursuant to procedure approved by Board Order, dated November 1, 1988, the Public Works Director
sent a Notice of Intention to Adopt a Resolution of Necessity for acquisition by eminent domain of real
property in the Oakley area for the construction of the Vintage Parkway signal, and set Tuesday,
February 27, 1996, at 2:00 p.m. as the date and time affected owners may appear and be heard as to
matters specified by law under C.C.P. Section 1245.235 as set forth below.
Upon recommendation of County Counsel, the following report is made for the Board's information and
consideration prior to taking action upon said hearing.
I. Proposed Project-The project consists of the installation of a traffic signal and widening of State
Hwy 4 at the Vintage Parkway intersection. The signal will include a left turn pocket on eastbound
4 and widening the roadway from its current width of 48' to approximately 84' at the intersection.
In order to proceed with the project, it is necessary for the County to exercise. its power of eminent
domain. Pursuant to Section 1245.235 of the Code of Civil Procedure, notice was given to the
following persons whose names and addresses appear on the last equalized County Assessment
Roll:
Walter & Sylvia Rippee United Centro Properties
3025 O'Hara Avenue c/o Atherton & Dozier
Brentwood, CA 94513 Attorneys at Law
305 N. EI Dorado Street#301
Stockton, CA 95202
Mr. & Mrs. Harold Rodrigues June B. Swanson
7 Mark Way 7335 Ackerman Avenue
Antioch, CA 94509 Las Vegas, NV 89131
This notice consisted of sending by first-class and certified mail on February 8, 1996, a Notice of
Intention which notified these owners that a hearing is scheduled for Tuesday, February 27, 1996, at
2:00 p.m. in the Board's Chambers, at which time they may appear to be heard on the matters referred
to in the notice:
II. Scope of Hearing Per C.C.P. Section 1245.235
A. Public Interest and Necessity require the proposed project.
The existing roadway is a two lane roadway with areas of existing widening done by on
going developments. A traffic signal will be installed and widening performed at the
intersection of Highway 4 and Vintage Parkway to allow safe entry and access to Highway
4 from Vintage Parkway.
B. The project is planned and located in the manner that will be most compatible with the
greatest public good and the least private iniury.
The project has been designed to minimize the impacts to abutting properties by
conforming to the existing roadway centerline, widening symmetrically, and conforming to
the General Plan. Also, the project plans are in conformance with Caltrans and Public
Works standards.
C. The property sought to be acquired is necessary for the project,
The partial fee takes and permanent easements required for the construction and
maintenance of the roadway and signal are shown on the right of way drawings on file with
the Public Works Department.
III. Recommended Action
A. Board to ask if any notified property owners wish to be heard as to the three items
specified in Section II above.
B. Upon completion and closing of the hearing, it is recommended that the Board make the
findings and determinations listed under II A, B and C above, make an additional finding
that the offer of compensation required by Section 7267.2 of the Government Code has
been made to the owner or owners of record, adopt a Resolution of Necessity to acquire
the required property by eminent domain and direct the Board Clerk to file a copy of this
report.
JMW:KML:gio
g:\realprop\temp\CO20aVP.t2
cc: County Administrator's Office
County Counsel
Real Property
Board Clerk-If approved by the Board, please file a copy of this report in your records.