Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council authorizes eminent domain proceedings for Gilman Drive segment of Coastal Rail Trail despite owner objections
Summary
Council adopted a resolution of necessity to begin eminent domain for easements along Gilman Drive for the Coastal Rail Trail after staff said four of six property owners reached agreements and two did not; one owner testified the offer was inadequate and would render her lot unbuildable.
City staff presented a Resolution of Necessity seeking authorization to commence eminent domain proceedings for easements needed to construct a segment of the Coastal Rail Trail along Gilman Drive (CIP SD-00951). Supervising property agent Christina Cruz said negotiations succeeded with four of six affected property owners; two owners — identified in staff materials as Robinson Wood and Loudermilk parcels — have not reached terms and staff seeks council authorization to proceed if negotiations fail.
Cruz described the rights the city needs — permanent bicycle easements, slope easements and temporary construction easements — and said the city had appraised the property rights and made offers based on independent appraisals. She told the council the action is limited to making the four legally required findings for a resolution of necessity under California eminent domain law and the California Code of Civil Procedure.
A property owner who identified herself on the record opposed the resolution, saying the proposed slope easement would render her lot unbuildable and disputing the city's valuation. “Basically, I'm against the eminent domain on my property,” the speaker said, explaining she had obtained an independent appraisal that was much higher than the city's offer and that the matter had caused personal and financial hardship.
Council members questioned staff about the negotiation timeline and whether the vote would stop ongoing negotiations; staff said adoption of the resolution would not foreclose further negotiation and that the next step would be filing an eminent domain complaint and likely a motion for immediate possession if necessary. Several council members said they preferred continued negotiation but agreed the resolution was a required legal step to preserve the city’s project schedule if negotiations failed.
Council voted to adopt the resolution and authorize the city attorney to institute eminent domain proceedings and deposit funds in the state condemnation fund as needed to pursue the project. Council and staff repeated that compensation will be determined by continued negotiations or a court process if necessary.
