Correspondence - #29 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Name: Address: ' . Phone: Email: Date: AugusttQe 2023 Re: City Council Hearing on August 15, 2023 Objection to Application for Abandonment of ortain easement/right of way located at 2383 N. Flower street, Santa Ana, CA; (Abandonment No. 2023-01); Applicants Colin Donnelly and Carolina Fa Oear Mayor and City Council We arerers�ldents at the above address. We have been residents at said address since 1 0 J . We understand Mw M atthehas been an Application to Abandon e alleyway looted between 79 and 2383 North Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA, our neighborhood alleyway. We strongly are opposed to the reverting of said property as stated on Applicant's application for the following reasons: I. First, we do not believe there was everan easement for said alleyway, It is a dedicated roadway. We strongly belleve that alley is a PUBLIC ROADWAY. We strongly object to the fact that the City of Santa Is [Mending on GIFTING PUBLIC FUNDS to the Applicants, The alleyway belongs to the People. We are of the opinion that glfting of Public funds for free is Illegal. The valve of said "gift" Could possibly be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars taken from our community. 2. We believe the gifting of said land increases the Applicants' property by approximately 1,150 sq. IS of prime property In Santa Ana. 3. We objett to the Fact that our community was not informed property of the Applicants' application to have Me property "reverted" to 2383 North Flower. That property is a PUBLIC ROADWAY— there is nothing to "revert". We, the people, are deserving of proper Notice. a. We object that the Applicants intend on having await built to block the alleywayso noone has access to that public roadway. This Is our community; the location of thls property is not for Individualuse. We never agreed to give the property to anyone. This alleyway will be closed for Public use should you approve this Application. 5. We also Object to the ha that our neighbors adjacent to said alleyway In Heliotrope will be restricted and inconvenienced by said closure of this alleyway. They do not have driveways, so they must access their garages via the alleyway. Those neighbors have legal rights to full access to this alleyway. It also creates a dangerous driving condition in that people may have to back up onto Heliotrope Ra car is Coming down the alley. B. The residence looted at 2379 North Flower will also be greatly Impacted if this "reverting"is approved. This is not an easement, it is a dedicated roadway, nothing to "revert'. The property owner at 2379 also has rights, as do we. 7. Said alleyway has been there for too yearst The Applicants have owned their residence at 2383 N. Flower for 22 months. We love aurneighbomood justas his, we do not need to close alleyways for Individuals who have not given thought to our community. S. Additional verbiage has been added to the legal description ofAppliam" ppllcatlo,. Applicants are claiming the alleyway belongs to them, and thus, want the alleyway "reverted". This NEW languagejust appeared out of nowhere. The City must Way, all ORIGINAL maps and records to disprove this claim. 9. We also believe that alley way property was DEDICATED to the City of Santa Ana by prior owners of said land/alleyway in the year 1925, and not as an easement over the Applicants' Property at 2383 N. Flower. 10. We are adamant and herewith request that the City of Santa Ana either take the matter OR calendar for further review by the City Attorney and/or any other departments needed to establish said ownership of that property or that the City Council abolish all further discussion on this matter and terminate said Application with no furtherdiscussion. We prefer the latter. Thank you in advance for your consideration into this matter. We wish In be contacted directly by the City with any decisions made on this Application. Our Contract information is noted above. Thank you for your ti and your efforts siijn�rejecting this Application. By:.