HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1977/10/04 Item 13CITY OF CHULA VISTA
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item No. 13
For meeting of 10/4/77
ITEM TITLE Resolution 8839: Requesting that the Office of the County Tax
Collector Prepare an Agreement to Purchase Certain Real
Property in the City of Chula Vista (Parcel 623 41-30)
SUBMITTED BY Director of Public Works/City Engineer ~~~~~~~
ITEM EXPLANATION (4/5TH'S VOTE REQUIRED YES_ NO x )
The City Council, on January 12, 1971, approved the final map for
Holiday Estates, Unit No. 6 Subdivision, by Resolution No. 5910. One
of the conditions of approval of the final map was that the developer
was to improve Lots 368 and 383 as park sites. The developer was
also required to dedicate these lots to the City for park purposes.
On July 11, 1972, the City Council, by Resolution No. 6511, accepted
the public improvements in Holiday Estates Subdivision, Unit No. 6.
The improvements accepted included the park improvements within Lots
368 and 383.
It has recently been brought to the attention of Engineering staff that
the developer of Holiday Estates, Unit No. 6 Subdivision, Jafro Inc.,
never dedicated Lots 368 and 383 to the City for park purposes. The
City of Chula Vista received, on August 19, 1977, from the Office of
the County Tax Collector, a notice of intent to deed certain properties
within the City of Chula Vista to the State for unpaid back taxes. One
of the parcels to be deeded to the State and sold for taxes includes
Lot 368 (Parcel 623-341-30), which was improved as a park site, accepted
by the City Council and has been maintained as a park site by the City
for the past five years.
The County Tax Collector has informed the City that after the parcels
have been deeded to the State they are eligible for sale to the City
in accordance with Division 1, Part 6, Chapter 8, of the State Revenue
and Taxation Code. Since Lot 368 was developed as a park site and the
City has been maintaining this site since the City Council accepted the
RJG:et LY073/FY010 (Continued on Supplemental Page 2)
rv~ i rn rTn
rnnibii~
Agreement Resolution x Ordinance_ Plat x Notification List!
Other ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT: Attached Submitted on
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The cost of acquiring the parcel, Lot 368, from the State, which is esti-
mated at this time to be approximately $300.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
City Council adopt Resolution.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
COUNCIL ACTION
APpR~vED
by the
~,t,7 Cp4n~il
of
Cwlitornia
.-;
`,~., `y,,,a.
~_ ,...
G''
.... _..
.. ..
...
~O "............~.....
D?,,ted_. __, ,....
Agenda Item 13
Supplemental Page Two
10/4/77
improvements, staff is recommending that the City proceed with the pur-
chase of Lot 368 from the State. The first step in the process to pur-
chase this parcel is for the City Council to adopt a resolution request-
ing that the Office of the County Tax Collector prepare an agreement
to purchase this property.
Engineering staff has contacted the developer of Holiday Estates, Unit
No. 6, Jafro, Inc., with regards to the conveyance of Lots 368 and 383
to the City of Chula Vista. Jafro, Inc. has indicated that they will
execute a quitclaim deed, quitclaiming any interest that they have in
Lots 368 and 383 to the City of Chula Vista. The execution of a quit-
claim deed will convey Lot 383 to the City, since this lot is not delin-
quent in taxes. The City, however, must purchase Lot 368 from the State
in order to gain title to this parcel. Staff is pursuing the quitclaim
deed with Jafro, Inc. and will submit this quitclaim deed to the City
Council after it has been executed.
The delinquent taxes against Lot 368 is $89.98. The cost to the City,
however, to purchase this parcel is determined by the County Tax Col-
lector. Since Lot 368 is being utilized as a park site, staff expects
that the City should be able to purchase the parcel for the back taxes
administrative and publishing costs, which should not exceed $300.
Exact cost to the City for purchasing the parcel will be determined
at the time the County Tax Collector prepares an agreement to purchase.
Adoption of this resolution does not obligate the City to approve an
agreement.
A transparency is available for Council viewing.
/'Lot
tv ~ v
2 TA/!AR/NOO Wf7Y 1
Q ,. , _
W `-
J
0
0 vfli?
V
~i~io~ Bounda~
CoNNOLEY
C~RCC F
Pa~ksifes
NOLE/ C/RGLE
6ound~~j~
4
N
~~ti
h~~
HOL/DAY ESTATES
UN/T N° 6