12. Vacation Crescent CtCUPERTINO
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Summary
AGENDA ITEM I
AGENDA DATE September 1, 2009
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Adopt a resolution vacating a remaining parcel dedicated by Subdivision 9875, Crescent Manor
(Kelly Gordon, 10114 Crescent Court).
BACKGROUND
The approved final map of Subdivision 9875 (copy attached) includes the dedicafion of a
remainder parcel that adjoins Stevens Creek. Approval of the dedication was done in error, since
there is no public need for a dedication. Because the dedication was offered more than one year
but less than five years ago, and has not been employed for any public purpose, Section 8333 of
the California Streets and Highways Code providE:s for its summary vacation.
By earlier correspondence, the sub-divider, Kelly Gordon Development Corporation claimed in
December of 200b that the City required dedication of this remainder parcel for pazk use and
therefore the City should refiind the $63,000 paid by Kelly Gordon as a Park dedication fee. The
Council had received copies of the original letter of protest by Kelly Gordon and letters from
staff in response. The original response from staff is attached to this report.
In summary, the history and facts of the matter as contained in staff s letter of June 5, 2009,
show that there was no dedication of land required for the subdivision of any park site. The
payment of the park fee of $63,000 is required in lieu of any dedication of parkland property and
is not in any way a redundant requirement as claimed by Kelly Gordon.
In addition, the irrevocable offer of the dedication of the remainder parcel was not accepted by
the City on the final map, nor was it specifically accepted with completion of the improvements.
This pazcel is unbuildable and unusable for any purpose except as a maintenance easement for
the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD)„ not the City. Instead, the offer of dedication
was to remain open to allow access to the creek, and was not intended to be accepted until the
City could come to an agreement with the SCVWD on joint use of the area for creek
12-~
maintenance. However, the County Recorder appazently misinterpreted the later acceptance of
easements conveyed by the subdivision to include the dedication of the remainder parcel, so that
the-Assessor's Map shows the parcel as having been conveyed. This was not the City's intent nor
direction.
Since the intent of the City was to provide primarily for creek maintenance access for the
SCVWD, the staff is recommending to the Council that this error in the filing of the final map be
corrected by summarily vacating {i.e., abandoning) that parcel while reserving a creek
maintenance easement for the SCVWD. The underlying fee ownership of the remainder parcel
will revert back to Kelly Gordon and/or the successor owners of the subdivision parcels, and
maintenance of the area not associated with the creek will then be the responsibility of Kelly
Gordon and/or the successor owners through the instrument that provides for common
maintenance of the site road.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution No. 09- tJ(D ,vacating the remaining parcel dedicated by Subdivision
9875, Crescent Manor (Kelly Gordon, 10114 Crescent Court).
Submitted by:
C.~c cam(
ph A. Qualls, Jr.
Director of Public Works
Approved for submission:
David W. Knapp
City Manager
Attachment A Resolution
Attachment B Letter to Kelly Gordon of June 5, 2009
Attachment C Exhibit A, Legal Description
Attachment D Exhibit B, Map
12-2
Attachment A
RESOLUTION NO.09-136 DRAT
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
VACATING A REMAINING PARCEL DEDICATED BY TRACE' 9875,
CRESCENT MANOR (KELLY GOx:DON, 10114 CRESCENT COURT)
WHEREAS, the developer Kelly Gordon dedlicated the remainder parcel of Tract 9875,
Crescent Manor to the City; and
WHEREAS, there is no specific public purp~~se for the dedication; and
WHEREAS, since the dedication was offere-d more than one year but less than five years ago,
and has not been employed for any public purpose, Section 8333 of the California Streets and
Highways Code provides for its summary vacation; and
WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works has determined that there will be no further public
need for said remainder parcel if a stream maintenance easement over said remainder parcel is reserved
as a condition of the vacation of said remainder parcel.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE TT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Cupertino
hereby vacates the remainder parcel dedicated by Tract 9875, Crescent Manor, recorded Apri15, 2007,
as shown and described on the attached map and d~_escription, as provided for in Section 8333 of the
California Streets and Highways Code, reserving on behalf of the Santa Clara Valley Water District a
stream maintenance easement over said remainder parcel.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Cupertino that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to record the executed original Resolution in the
Office of the Recorder of the County of Santa Clam, at which time the area vacated will no longer be
public property, but will revert to the Tract 9875 subdivider or the successors of the subdivider.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino
this lst day of September 2009 by the following vote:
Vote Members of the C~ C'ouncil
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: .APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
12-3
Attachment B
CUPERTtNO
June 5, 2009
PUBUIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Ralph A. Qualls, Jr., Director
CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE - CUPERTINO, CA 950143266
(408) 777-3354 w FAX {408) 777-3333
Scott Kelly
Kelly Gordon Development Corpora#ion
12241 Saratoga Sunnyvale Road, Suite C
Saratoga, California 95070
Subject: Subdivision 9875 at 10114 Crescent Court:
Protest of Approved Land Dedication & Park Fee Requirement
Deaz Mr. Kelly:
This letter is in response to your a-mail of Apri121, 2009 to the Mayor and City Council
regazding your protest of the land dedication and park fee requirements that the Cupertino
City Council approved in connection with the above subject land division. The Staff
understands that it is your contention that, because the land division dedicated the remainder
parcel adjacent to the creek, the condition that the subdivision pays a pazk in-lieu fee is
inappropriate. We apologize for the delay in responding but since the a-mail went only to the
Council and since the project approval occurred over 2 1/z years ago, it took some time to
fully research the facts in order to pursue this response.
Chapter 18.24 of the Cupertino Municipal Code (CMC) does not envision that a subdivision
of 50 parcels ox fewer will be required to both pay a park in-lieu fee and dedicate parkland.
However, the remainder parcel was never intended to be parkland. The City's General Plan
does not call for parkland in addition to Varian Park in the planning area of which the
subject subdivision is a part. In addition, the slope, geotechnical, and creek proximity
considerations preclude the remainder lot from ever becoming a building site suitable for
any sort of Park use.
In the Council's approval of the tentative map on September 19, 2006, the City specifically
referred to an irrevocable offer (emphasis added} of dedication to the Santa Clara Valley
Water District (SCVWD) (emphasis added) as a riparian buffer, per General Plan
Environmental Resources preservation policy, and for SCVWD creek maintenance
purposes.
~z-a
It is clear from communications you had with the City's Planning Department during the
subdivision's approval process that you expressed an interest in having the City take over
the parcel, presumably because its slope and proximity to the creek make it unbuildable, as
well as to relieve the future owners of the obligation to maintain it. Such a proposal would
not be in the City's interest and the City would not accept the dedication under those
circumstances or any others except on behalf of the SCVWD.
As such, there was no dedication of Iand required for the subdivision of any pazk site, so the
payment of the pazk fee of $63,000 is required ui lieu of any dedication of parkland property,
and is not in any way a redundant requirement tftat you referred to as a "double dip".
In addition, the irrevocable offer of the dedication of the remainder parcel was not accepted
by the City an the final map, nor was it specifically accepted with completion of the
improvements. As noted above, this parcel is unbuildable and unusable for any purpose
except as a maintenance easement for the SCV~'V, not the City. Because of those conditions,
the suggestion in your a-mail to the Council that: the remainder parcel~was worth $ 1 Million
further strains the credibility of your protest.
Be that as it may, the dedication was to remain open to allow access to the creek, and was
not intended to be accepted until the City could come to an agreement with the SCVWD on
joint use of the area for creek maintenance.:i-lowever, the County Recorder apparently
interpreted the later acceptance of easements conveyed by the subdivision to include the
dedication of the remainder parcel, so that the ,Assessor's Map shows the parcel as having
been conveyed. This was not the City's intent nor direction.
Since the intent of the City was to provide primarily for creek maintenance access for the
SCVWD, the Staff will recommend to the Council that this error in the filing of the final
map be corrected by summarily vacating (i.e. abandoning) that parcel while reserving a
creek maintenance easement for the SCVWI~. The underlying fee ownership of the
remainder parcel will revert back to Kelly Gordon and/or the successor owners of the
subdivision parcels, and maintenance of the area not associated with the creek will then be
the responsibility of Kelly Gordon and/or the successor owners through the instrument that
provides for common maintenance of the site road.
We will notify you of the date of the Council's consideration of this recommendation.
Because of the process and notice required of wren a summary vaca#ion, it is not likely that
the matter will be scheduled until August or September of 2009.
Sincerely,
~~
Ralph A. Qualls, Jr.
Director of Public Works .
C: Honorable Mayor and City Council
David W. Knapp, City Manager
Carol Korade, City Attorney
12-5
Attachment C
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL pESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
Said property being the remainder pazcel of Tract No. 9875, Crescent Manor, recorded
April 5, 2007, in Book 812 of Maps at Pages 47 and 48, Santa Clara County Records,
shown on said tract map as "AREA TO BE DEDICATED TO THE CITY OF CUPERTINO, 37,068
sQ. FT.," and more particularly described as follows.
Commencing at a point, the point of beginning, marked by a 3/a -inch iron pipe, tagged
RCE 20597, said point being the most southerly corner of Lot 4 of the aforementioned
Tract No. 9875; thence departing said point of beginning S. 41 ° 32' 15' E. 92.69 feet to
a point; thence S. 40° 43' 00' E. 103.65 feet to the most southerly corner of Tract No.
9875; thence departing said most southerly comer and proceeding along the nominal
centerline of Stevens Creek N. 09° 57' 00" E. 317.70 feet to the most easterly corner of
Tract No. 9875; thence departing said most easterly. corner and proceeding along the
northeasterly boundary of Tract No. 9875 N. 43° 12' 00" W. 204.16 feet to a point,
marked by a 3/a -inch iron pipe, tagged RCE 20597, said point being on the
northeasterly boundary of Crescent Court and Lot 1 of the aforementioned Tract No.
9875; thence departing said point and proceeding along the boundary of Crescent Court
on a 50-foot-radius curve to the right through an arc of 89° 22' S2" a distance of 78.00
to a point marked by a 3/4 -inch iron pipe, tagged RCE 20597; thence along the
boundary of Crescent Court on a tangent S. 46° 10' S2" W. 2.18 feet to a point marked
by a 3/a -inch iron pipe, tagged RCE 20597, said point being on the northeasterly
boundary of Lot 5 of the aforementioned Tract No. 9875; thence along said
northeasterly boundazy of Lot 5 S. 41 ° 17' 15" E. 50.31 feet; thence S. 16° 19'31" E.
89.41 feet to a point on the southeasterly boundary of Lot 5; thence proceeding along
said southeasterly boundary S. 39° 56' 37" W. 77.00 feet; ~ thence along the
southeasterly boundary of the previously mentioned Lot 4 S. 39° 56' 37" W. 77.42 feet
back to the point of beginning.
Said property contains approximately 0.85 acres.
12-6
Attachment D
REFERENCE DOCINIIENTS
R1: AFFlOANT N0. 12472246, SANTA CLARA COUNTY RECORDS ,
R2: RECORD OF SURVEY, gpq( 148 OF MAPS AT PAGE 53, SANTA CLARA COUNTY RECORDS
R3: RECORD OF SURVEY, g00K 345 OF MAPS AT PAGE 31, SANTA CLARA COUNTY RECORDS
e®
SCALE t"=30'
Nair=:
THE CITY OF CUPERTINO OWNS LAND AROUND
THIS SUBDINSION AND THERE MIGHT BE FUTURE
TRAILS ALONG STEVENS CREEK.
FOUND J/4"IRON PIPE
CRESCENT',
COURT ~
O
h
`- M
e~~
:ap
eo~
qqnq
`I>~4
~ d=89'22'52°
~
'
_
R=SD.00
S41'tTtYE
_ ~ L=78.00'
..._ ^
125
ye' _
~
.
~ \
gAS15 OF BEARINGS ~Br28'09
~ R=20.00' ~
L=30,53'
L
15 6U1 OT-1
5Q. FT., GROSS
1,263 S0. fT,, NET
IPA 9RB-14-006
IJNDS 016 CITY 016 CUPE'RTI1V0
DOG ~3040Q81
~=68'43'55'
R=59.00' .
L=59.9B'
i
01
m 1 115D.33' 15.
^ ~ E%ISTING LOT UNE w
N TO BE 0.1MINATED ~~ 4--51'24'22" P~
R=20.D0' a .
L~17.94'
ro ~ x43'23'30"
~+ I R=36.00'
E%, U11UTY (WATER $ GAS) L=27.28'
~ EASEMENT, 5' N1DE
11,776 . FT., G SS PR
lp 253 SQ FT NET ~ E.A.E.,
V
e
~-ShNIThRY SEVER EASEMENT (SSE), 678 S0. Ff
TRACT NO'. 9875
CRESCENT MANOR
9ik~T TY10 aF 7110
ALL Of THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY SITUATE IN THE qTY OF CUPERTINO, COUNTY OF
SANTA CLARA, STATE ~ CALIFORNIA AND CONSISTING OF ALL OF THAT REAL PROPERTY
DESCRtBEp IN THE QUIT CLAIM DEED RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NUMBER 16061055'ANp A
PORTION OF PARCEL A AND ALL OF PARCEL C AS SHOWN ON THE RECORD OF SURVEY
RECORDED IN BOOK 148 OF MAPS AT PAGE SJ SANTA CLARA COUNTY RECORDS,
n~~~~n gVIL ENGIN~~
E11Gi~EERi11G col4srRUCrION
CUPERTINO; CA.
LEGEND
543'12'00°E 328.04' DISTINCTIVE BORDER LINE
20d.16' . °~
~' \ NEW LOT UNE
-~ S46'47'00"W 16.48'
'
" \
EASEMENT UNE
51742
52
E 21.98'
'
'
"
''
' \
S72
17
08
W 1065
/
~/_ N32'32'04`W ~ \ RECORD DATA AS SHOWN
/Y/ 16.70' IN THE REFERENCE DOCUMENT
FOUND MONUMENT AS NOTED
- N4690'S2"E 216'
MARCH 2007
41'17'17"E 65.32 ~ ' AREl4• TO BE DEDICATED \ 3/4° IRON PIPE SET AND TAGGED "RCE 20547°
15,ot 50.3t' TO THE CITY OF CUPERTINO, 37,068 SQ. FT.\~
"
'
AI
n
s ~ '!
7
6
r
'
• nf°EA i~
oc
DEDiCAiGU AS A SLOPE EASEMENT
:d
y,
, :
:
s
3t~ ~
e
, IPN s,2e-1s-048
IdHAS
~
„~~N
a rn
-$-t~
' _
: -°
LOT_5
15,402 SQ. FT., GROSS Of S.G/.-
\
,~` DOS iE8$158f
\ y~ ,D.
EMERGENCY ACCESS EASEMENT,
£~l0
~
^' 13,175 .SQ. FT., NET
\F PUBUC RECIPROCAL~INGRESS/EGRESS EASEMENT,
PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT,
~~ '1
X51
'
' F~ PRIVATE STORM GRAIN EASEMENT,
; 13
46
.
'
\ PRIVATE SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT.
m
~ ~+ R=20.00 ~
L=17,66.
\'L SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT.
'
07 n ~
~• G 42'49'58"
X44'26'02"' R=65.00' ,P
R=36.00' L=46.59' '~ ~.
`~f~; ~•
p
~,
•
0
EA.E.
P.I.E.E
P.U.E.
P.S.D,E
P,S,S.E'
S.S.E
" L=27.92' , . ~ ~ ~s ~ ~~
H ~. \
~O, 7HE BEARING Iy50'2r25°E FOR THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF PARCELS 1, 2 AND 3
T ROAD +~i F AS FOUND MONUMENIED AND AS DESCRIBED IN THE DEED RECORDED AS DOVCUMENT
E.E., P.U.E., N57'O1'02°E b ` X16061055 SANTA CLARA COUNTY RECORDS WAS USED AS THE BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR
~ ' '' P.S.O,E P,S.S.E 2.61' ~ ? SLOPE EASEMENT THIS MAP.
Z 541'1T17"E ~ 2°E N41'1T17"W ///~ I
~ 134,78' 6.p0 " 36.00 ` 117.37 \
~) I Z N5T01'02"E
e h~ ~ ( 6=95'38'44 J
p ~ O + R=36.00' \ ~ u / p=49'09,5269
L=60.10' o ~ 3744'14 w
`~` ~ o < I LOT-3 °• o R=36.00' =75.x' , \
N ~ o ~ L=6231' = 9. 0. ~ \
oo~ °' h 12,860 SQ, FT., GROSS \ m / ~,
h q• ^ 11,77 S0. FT., NET A A
p . i ~ z 12,098 . FT., GROSS N
~~~ t + N ~ 10,976 SQ. Fl:, NET N3s's4'1z"E
w u ~=173727" 9,23'
1 ~ ° °o Rr30.00' I \.
64.99' _ _ 108.10' 164.50' L=9.23'
S41'2821 E ~ - _ - 31.4 _ 103.65' _ _
541'32'15°E 365.28' ~ .. 92.69' -_~~`
~~ S40'43'QO"E
FOUND J/4"1RON PIPE, ~- FOl1N0 J/4"IROi PIPE,
IPA aR6-17-041 IPN J,t6-!7-004
IPA J,tf-17-Od6 DOC ~ OJ7a0,t~ DOG ~ 1487aQ/~
L1NDS O161i/IBISEI/L 0 TRUST ~.
DoG leo4oael
JOB N0. 171--03
\~5',kdy~~~
- - _ _ Exhibit P'
~~
~1 z i
~I
1r
12 7