Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFY 1991-1992 Landscape and Lighting AD T23982 Sonata 09-26-1991 INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM CITY OF PALM DESERT TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Richard J. Folkers, Assistant City Manager/Public Works Director SUBJECT: LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT, FISCAL YEAR 1991-92 FOR TRACT 23982 - SONATA DATE: September 26, 1991 RECOMMENDATION: By minute motion, approve the following: ( 1) Each property owner in Tract 23982 shall pay $250.00 for the subject landscape maintenance. (2) Payment shall be made in full to the City upon invoice. (3) Any payments not collected in fiscal year 1991-92 shall be added to the fiscal year 1992-93 assessment. (4) Beginning fiscal year 1992-93, the property owners shall be assessed for the full annual estimated costs. BACKGROUND: During the public hearings for the annexation and levy of assessments for the Landscape and Lighting District No. 6 (Monterey Meadows) for fiscal year 1991-92, concerns were raised by the property owners on Sonata Court (Tract 23982 - Sonata) as to the assessment process and cost. By Council action, the subdivision was annexed into the district; a recommendation was made to direct staff to review the situation with the developer and residents; and a zero dollar assessment was made for fiscal year 1991-92. The City has tried to reach a solution with the property owners. The current situation with the property owners is that they are still trying to determine any responsibility or fault of the developer in the disclosure of their obligation to the maintenance district. Presently, the City has assumed the maintenance responsibility for the parkway areas adjacent to the subdivision. When the assessment district budget for fiscal year 1991-92 was developed, the estimated annual cost for the Sonata subdivision (Tract 23982) was $10,026.00. For the sixteen parcels in the subdivision, this would be an (Page 1 of 2) City Council and City Manager Page 2 September 26, 1991 annual assessment of $626.62 per parcel . The largest single expense of landscape maintenance was bid at $250.00, one half the estimated amount. With a $3,000.00 reduction, the annual assessment would be reduced to $440.00 per parcel . The property owners expressed their opposition to the payment of $626.62 and continue to express a very strong opposition the payment of $440.00. A proposal was developed where each of the property owners pay $250.00 for the first year and the developer and City share the difference of $190.00 per parcel . After the first year, all expenses would be covered by full assessment of the property owners. An alternative proposal would be that the City and developer cover the first year's expense. The City would contribute $345.00 per parcel and the developer would contribute $95.00 per parcel . Again, after the first year, all expenses would be covered by a full assessment. At this point, it appears that no unanimous decision or solution can be reached by the individual property owners. Public Works staff recommends that the City Council approve the following proposal : 1) Each property owner in Tract 23982 shall pay $250.00 for the landscape maintenance for fiscal year 1991-92 per the letter dated July 24, 1991 , sent by the Public Works Department (see attachment) . 2) That the property owners pay in full upon invoice. 3) Any payments not collected in fiscal year 1991-92 shall be added to the fiscal year 1992-93 assessment. 4) Starting in fiscal year 1992-93, the property owners shall be assessed for the full annual estimated -osts. \itfrefte--"---/ 4CR RD J. FOL E S, P.E. REVIEWED AND CONCUR CITY MANAGER RJF:TB/ms Attachment (As Noted) REVIEWED AND CONCUR DIRECTOR OF FINANCE MEETING DATE Ci 1 (Page 2 of 2) CONTINUED TO low4 Eci i ( t o y sy-\ ❑ PASSED TO 2ND READING t. y • 1 = -� ©INT CA C/0 D esein ; '�°;a 3N 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 TELEPHONE(619)346-0611 July 24, 1991 ' Sonata Court Palm Desert, CA 92260 Subject: LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT 1991-92 - TRACT 23982 - SONATA Dear Property Owner: During the public hearings for the annexation and levy of assessments for the landscaping and lighting districts for fiscal year 1991-92, concerns were raised by the property owners on Sonata Court (Tract 23982 Sonata) , as to the process and cost of the estimated annual assessment of $626.62 per parcel . A recommendation was made to direct staff to review the situation with the residents and developer and the Council moved to levy a zero dollar assessment for fiscal year 1991-92. The situation was reviewed with the City Attorney and qualified assessment engineer with the following conclusions: 1 . The assessment district that has been established for the maintenance of improvements that were made during the development of Tract 23982 is consistent with City policy and all required provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 were followed. 2. The benefit and distribution of maintenance costs, for the installed improvements along Hovley Lane West and Portola Avenue adjacent to Tract 23982 (Sonata) to those property owners, is justified. City staff met with all the property owners and Barcon Development on Tuesday, July 9, 1991 . The meeting was intended to find an agreeable solution to the maintenance responsibility, cost and payment. City staff was notified that a second meeting set for July 18, 1991 , was cancelled. In order to facilitate a solution the following proposal is offered: 1 . The annual budget for maintenance, operations and administration has been adjusted down to $7,040.00. Fortunately, a lower than anticipated landscape maintenance bid has been accepted, allowing a cost savings to he passed on to the property owners now. 2. Based on the adjusted budget, the annual assessment would be $440.00 per parcel . For fiscal year 1991-92 we are requesting that each property owner pay $250.00 we will recommend that the balance of $190.00 be covered by the developer and City. (Page 1 of 2) • • Subject: LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT 1991-92 TRACT 23982 - SONATA This amount was determined to be fair based on previous suggestions from the property owners and developer. If the Sonata and Sonata II developments were combined and averaged the cost would be $256.00 per parcel and if all the subdivisions were averaged the cost would be $274.00 per parcel . As pointed out in the meeting of July 9th, this simple average does not properly distribute cost and benefit and cannot be applied. 3. Since no assessment was levied for the current Fiscal year, the property owners will be invoiced by the City for the $250.00 in two installments of $125.00 on September 1 , 1991 , and March 1 , 1992. 4. During the first year, the City and developer will work to reduce maintenance and operational costs while maintaining an acceptable ' landscape theme. 5. Starting in fiscal year 1992-93 (July 1 , 1992) the property owners will be assessed for the full amount of the estimated operational and administrative costs. Any fund surplus will be carried over to the next year's budget. Please note your concurrence to the proposal on the second copy and return in the enclosed envelope. Thank you. Very truly yours, RICHARD J. FOLKERS, .E. ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER/PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR RJF:TB/lw cc: Bruce Altman, City Manager Dave Erwin, City Attorney Bar•con Development Enclosures CONCURRENCE • (Page 2 of 2) CITY OF PALM DESERT . yr • eAJ12"3123.6S-1 September I Oth lelEGEIV E D Irwin Gold SEP 2 3 1991 Barcon Development 41-625 Ec l et i c Suite H-1 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Palm Desert, CA, 92260 CITY OF PALM DESERT Re: City of Palm Desert Assessment District -Sonata I Dear Irwin: We, the homeowners of Sonata I , after reviewing the various letters sent by the City and Barcon Developers, have met and unanimously agree that we will attend the September 26th meeting of the City Council to express our mutual dissatisfaction with the latest proposal in the hope that a more reasonable agreement can be reached and this matter can be finally settled amicably. Very truly yours, cc : Richard Folkers ./1j/1/*1 V •-44-lifyoWeid ieg AAL,_ ckt IA`c ' \Nc\.) **44V"411 Ca:44e.--‘ r 'II/le/ giu LL 4/ pY:Xth'UX ItLti:_Ur'1th 'r'U1v1 ; y- t-'=11 11:l_14F.4:1 ? rig i1711'� ;#S 1 V'RANSNITTED FROM O9 . 2 . 91 11 P . 01 x it ':S MarE i3 N DIY[LOPMtN• September 26, 1991 ** FAX ** ** REGULAR MAIL ** Mr. Tom Bassler City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 RE: City of Palm Desert Maintenance District Assessment; Sonata I Dear Tom: As a follow-up to our telephone conversation yesterday, regarding preparation for the City Council meeting tonight where the Sonata I assessment will be discussed, enclosed please find a copy of our last correspondence to Larry Schoncite, a representative of the Sonata I homeowners, dated July 24, 1991 , which we anticipate will be germane to the City Council discussion . The letter serves to briefly summarize our view as to the issue as to whether the owners received "notice" of the proposed assessment, and we would like our correspondence entered in the record for the council meeting, should the notice issue arise. Thank you for your continued courtesy in this matter. Very truly yours, BARCON DEVELOPMENT, a California Limited Partnership c.JL. Golds general partner ILG/bw Enclosure 41-625 Erlertir R„Gtn N_, 12>1... n-..__, .. ___ 2.Y:XEROX TELECOF'I ER ?��10 , '.1- r-'.1 11:L_i_,HI I -- - /,r2ANSMITTED FROM 09 . 2,� . 91 11 P . 02 kAlOW 1 ' NIL WI r _ DDDDDDtrIN? July 24, 1991 Larry Schoncite 40-862 Sonata Court Palm Desert, CA 92260 RE: City of Palm Desert Maintenance District assessment - Sonata I Dear Larry: As we previously discussed, and as each Sonata I owner was made aware, the meeting tentatively scheduled for Thursday night July 18, 1991 regarding the referenced issue was postponed. The meeting seemed, at best, premature since there appeared to be only a limited opportunity for any reasonable accommodation between the Sonata I homeowners and Barcon until it was clear how the City of Palm Desert intended to proceed. As the owners are aware from the meeting with the City and Dennis Freeman of Barcon on Tuesday July 9, Barcon's obligation at the project officially ends on July 31 , 1991, which is more than one year after Barcon's maintenance obligation on the Sonata I exterior should have ended. As expressed in previous telephone conversations with Sonata I homeowners, and as Dennis Freeman expressed at the July 9 meeting, Barcon's position in this matter is that homeowners were informed of the maintenance district. Even if we agree to disagree with various homeowners as to question of whether information was provided verbally, the fact remains that both the CCR'S and the Preliminary Title Reports and Title Policies received by each and every Sonata I purchaser did, at the very least, put each respective purchaser on notice that a maintenance district was intended to be. created, and therefore each owner had an obligation to inquire further regarding the issue. We do not make this statement in order to add fuel to the fire, but simply to provide reasonable perspective. Even if we concede, for this discussion, that Barcon could have done abetter job of informing, that did not negate the need for purchasers to review and consider the written materials provided and referenced, nor does it mean that Barcon is somehow the responsible party. :XEROX TELECOF I ER 7010 ; 9-25-91 11:C 5NM i 619 417098;# 's .ANSf4I TTED FROM U cF� . 1 1 1 ; P . 03 k • Larry Schancite July 24, 1991 Page 2 The bottom line is, as it has always been, the amount of the assessment and not the fact of the assessment per se. Everyone knows that government services are not done for free. As each owner is aware, or certainly should be aware, Barcon had no role nor any input in the formulas used by the City of Palm Desert for determining the assessment amount. As expressed in to the City, we too were surprised at the correspondencean f the initial proposed assessment, and have encouraged the City to find a way to lower the amount. In fact, you will be pleased to know that the total assessment amount has been reduced to an estimated $440 per annum per lot (with an unused funds credited in the following year) . y In that regard, and after further discussions, we have reached an understanding with the City as to a proposal/offer to be made to each Sonata I owner. A letter detailing the proposal should be forthcoming to each owner from the City in about the next week. We look forward, along with the City, to your response. Finally, you may of course distribute this letter to all Sonata I owners. Very truly yours, BARC N DEVELOPMENT, - a Ca ifornia Limited Partnership r 7\/ 4 IL 4 ., cy_______ 0- Irwin L. •ld; general partner ILG/bw cc: Richard Folkers d�a *�, rt t tI E IV E D 1` ��� ; 1,�,� J U N 2 5 1991 0 ? Willi PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 5a \ CITY Of PALM DESERT DIVILOPPAINT June 24 , 1991 ** FAX ** ** HAND DELIVERED ** Tom Bassler City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 RE: Sonata I ; Proposed City of Palm Desert Maintenance District Dear Tom: As a• follow-up to our telephone conversations last week regarding the (now apparently controversial ) maintenance district which the City of Palm Desert will be establishing as to our Sonata I project, and in anticipation of the Palm Desert City Council meeting scheduled for June 27 , 1991 , please be advised as follows: 1 . We maintain that each and every homeowner was verbally informed that (a) the City would be maintaining the exterior landscaping and street lighting, (b) that a maintenance district would be formed by the City to accomplish such maintenance, • and (c) that homeowners would pay for the maintenance in an amount to be determined, through their property taxes; and 2 . The homeowners were , in fact, informed in writing that a maintenance district would be created at the project. In the CCR's for Sonata I , which were recorded on April 7 , 1989 as instrument number 110969 in the Records of Riverside County, and which were given during escrow to each purchaser, Section 3 . 03 provides (as to landscaping in those Sonata I areas not included within individual lots) , in pertinent part that "Owners shall have no responsibility to maintain any area . . . which lies within a maintenance district . . . " The information in this section coincides with the information we provided purchasers; that is , that a maintenance district would be created. Tom Bassler June 24 , 1991 Page 2 Of course, as the homeowners representatives are aware, we are continuing to work with them in an effort to assist them in holding down the costs associated with the district, both in terms of maintenance expense on the landscaping as it now exists , and exploring alternative landscaping types which will require less expensive maintenance. We have indicated to the homeowners that while we do not agree with the contention that they did not receive adequate information, and clearly do not agree with their contention that they had no written indication that a maintenance district would be formed, we nevertheless are attempting to act in a conciliatory fashion in order to reach a resolution which will satisfy, at least to some extent, their desires . We of course believe that the City must form the assessment district - as you are aware, the landscaping at the project has been maintained by Barcon for about two years now and not the one year limit originally intended before the district was to be formed. We hope that in a review of all facts and circumstances , the City Council will concur and will approve the maintenance district for Sonata I , while at the same time giving any possible latitude to the desires of the homeowners to have the assessment amount reasonably reduced. Finally, as also discussed, we do not plan to attend the Council meeting, in order to keep the hearing from (potentially) becoming a "contest" ; this letter essentially sets forth our position for Council consideration. Thank you for your courtesy in this matter. Very truly yours , BARCON DEVELOPMENT, a C lifornia Limited Partnership tzu Irwin L. _Gol s general partner ILG/bw AL.1►V iv tv,.,N L.) A REGULAR PALM DESERT rrty COUNCIL MI E I' (i * * * * * * * * * * * * MR. DAVID J. SUMMERS, Mobile Home Home Po e Conversion erark. Hen Cons saidult ants,with saitd he represented residents of Portola Palm Mobileto convert. ds from the City, it was very unlikely that the residents e a number be ofof lowle and moderate ilncome e said they were also concerned that because there residents in the park, the State would not be ea�ble�totprovide the total0 amount o 11 th that fundsa needed by the residents. He said they commitment has been made for some amount of funds. Councilman Wilson moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution Na. ELIA,. and any authorizing the submittal of a loan; application, execution of a standard agreement amendments thereto, ...and any related documents necessary to participate in the Mobilehome Park Resident Ownership Program and secure a commitment of funds from the California Department of Housing and Community 'Development. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by unanimous vote of the Council, Member Wilson moved to waive further reading and adopt Re Solution No. 251., authorizing the submittal of a loan application, execution of a standard agreement and any amendments s dmentss wtnheeretto�p, and any related documents p to participate in the Mobilehome Park necessary ident Ors Program and secure a commitment of funds from` the California Departmen car d b nantimous Housi of the d Community Development. Motion ...was. seconded by Kelly _ ...... Agency Board, XV. COMPLETION OF ITEMS HELD OVER FROM 4:00 P.M. SESSION and 1. Continued Business Item C - RE EST FOR r TOa SID 982 TIOnata I (ContdncapI•1 of e from Lighting Assessment for Fiscal Year 1991/92 fort ase,( the Meeting of August 22, 1991). Councilman Wilson moved to continue this matter to the meeting of October 24, 1991, with ght tolerant direction to staff to look into what the cost would be to retrofit the landscaping assessment district the existing tolerant landscaping, compare the costs to maintain. drought< tolerant landscaping, and work with the developer to determine who would pay for subject retrofitting. Motion was seconded; by Kelly and carried by unanimous' vote of the Council. XVI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - C None 8