Laserfiche WebLink
Item #15 <br />CITY OF COLTON <br />AGENDA REPORT <br />For Council Meeting of July 17, 2001 <br />TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL <br />APPROVAL: DARYL PARRISH, CITY MANAGER <br />J <br />FROM: KATHY KIVLEY, ASSISTANT TO TH5 CITY MANAGER <br />SUBJECT: FINAL APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE OF PARCEL MAP <br />14028 FOR RECORDATION — COLCO PROPERTIES, INC. <br />DATE: June 26, 2001 <br />BACKGROUND: <br />Parcel Map No. 14028 is a four -parcel residential subdivision located in the Reche Canyon <br />southeasterly section at Michelle Drive and Parvin Lane. This 2.25 -acre site is being developed <br />by Colco Properties, Inc. The underlining parent Tract Map (13362) to this Parcel Map <br />indicated a 120 -foot San Bernardino County Drainage Easement extending through this site. <br />The Engineer of Record, Douglas L. Goodman of Goodman & Associates, has conducted an <br />extensive search of the available records to determine whether there is actually a recorded <br />easement in existence on this site and none was found. The title company, Fidelity National <br />Title Company, has done a rigorous search for a recorded document of any type which would <br />have established this easement and they found none. <br />Douglas Goodman met with Mazin Kasey at San Bernardino County for the purpose of <br />clarifying the 120 -foot San Bernardino County Drainage Easement shown on the subject <br />parcel map. After discussions and research, there is no evidence supporting that there is an <br />easement on the property. The speculation at this point is there may have been a tentative <br />map or development study, performed on the property at some point prior to City of Colton <br />annexation, that suggested the need for this easement. However, neither the City nor the <br />County has any recorded easement nor justification for same. The City Engineer reviewed the <br />drainage calculations for the area and found the Q's (factor in measuring amount of drainage <br />over section of land) to be very low. He concluded that the need for 120 -foot drainage <br />easement is not necessary. His recommendation is that a 20 -foot drainage easement along <br />the northerly line of this property would meet the drainage requirements for the surrounding <br />flows. <br />DISCUSSION: <br />The Parcel Map has been reviewed for conformance with the Subdivision Map Act and local <br />ordinances. Staff recommends that the 120 -foot drainage easement be abandoned and accept <br />the proposed 20 -foot easement along the northerly line of the property for drainage. <br />Page 1 of 2 Item #15 <br />