Advertisement

YORBA LINDA : City-Homeowners Agreement Elusive

Share

A deadline set by the City Council to reach an agreement with five homeowners suing the city passed Friday with no settlement being struck.

The city had agreed to repair the back yards of several hillside houses damaged in a landslide last winter and offered the five homeowners a total of $85,000 for attorney and other fees.

The council gave the homeowners until noon Friday to accept the offer or it would be withdrawn.

Advertisement

But attorneys for the city and the homeowners said several of the homeowners were out of state and had not seen the offer.

While the offer technically expired at noon, City Atty. Leonard Hampel said he would recommend that the city extend it over the weekend to give the homeowners a chance to review it.

At a special meeting Tuesday night, the City Council approved the settlement offer to John and Barbara Conklin; Thomas and Betty Duteau; David and Karen Engel; Dana and Pamela Hunter, and James and Maureen Tunstill.

The five couples sued the city after heavy rains last winter caused damage to their homes on Rolling Hills Lane.

In the suit, the homeowners alleged that the city allowed improper drainage to be installed on their properties and on a development above them.

By allowing the developer of houses farther up the hill to channel runoff water to flow through an arroyo traversing their back yards, the lawsuit said, the city created an unnatural water flow, which eroded the slopes and caused the landslide.

Advertisement

As part of the settlement, the city agreed to repair the slide area and install a concrete pipe in the arroyo to prevent further erosion.

The repair and construction is expected to cost about $540,000.

An additional $25,000 will be spent on acquiring rights-of-way from eight nearby property owners, including the cost of acquiring four parcels using eminent domain.

The council approved the terms of the settlement on a 3-2 vote, with Mayor John M. Gullixson and Councilman Daniel T. Welch voting against it.

“The settlement amount is too large,” Gullixson said. “The city’s (liability) is not as great as our willingness to jump in and provide a remedy.”

Advertisement