My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Correspondence- Non-Agenda
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2023
>
09/19/2023 Regular
>
Correspondence- Non-Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/4/2023 9:54:18 AM
Creation date
9/13/2023 5:01:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Date
9/19/2023
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
91
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Law Offices of <br />KENT G. SNYDER <br />KENT G. SNYDER <br />KATHLEEN A.KELLY <br />kent@kentsnyderlaw.com <br />Ms. Sonia R. Carvalho <br />City Attorney, City of Santa Ana <br />22 Civic Center Plaza <br />Santa Ana, California 92701 <br />ATTORNEYAT LAW <br />2301 DUPONT DRIVE, SUITE 430 <br />IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92612 <br />August 22, 2023 <br />(949)833-9078 <br />Fax: (949) 833-8209 <br />kathleen@kentsnyderlaw.com <br />Re: Vacation of Allev in Floral Park between 2383 N. Flower and 2379 N. Flower <br />Street, Santa Ana, CA <br />Dear Ms. Carvalho: <br />As you know, I represent some of the property Owners on North Flower Street concerning a <br />proposed vacation of a city -owned alley, which runs between Flower Street and Heliotrope <br />Drive, in Ward 3 of the City of Santa Ana. I have now read the entire City file on this matter. <br />I would like to make the following comments and statements and ask that you review this <br />letter at the appropriate time with your client: <br />The Applicants caused the Title Report that the Applicants submitted to the City along <br />with their Application, to contain a false statement that the alley is an Easement. The <br />alley is not an Easement and never was an Easement. The alley was offered to the <br />City for Dedication for Public Use on the Tract Map which the City accepted, and <br />hence, the City owns the alley in fee simple absolute. California law recognizes the <br />Doctrine of Merger. If the Owner of the fee also owns an Easement, the Easement is <br />automatically extinguished by merger. Accordingly, there is not now and never was <br />an Easement in connection with this alley. Throughout the City documents I have <br />found repeated suggestions that this is an Easement, it is not an Easement, it is a fee <br />owned by the City dedicated for public use. <br />2. I would like you and your client to consider the fact that if this Application is <br />approved, it will create a dangerous traffic condition. This Application will not make <br />the area safer; it will make the area more prone to traffic collisions. The Donnellys <br />will have to back out of their driveway onto Flower Street. At the present time, the <br />Donnellys drive out of the alley going forward and exit on Heliotrope Drive. A much <br />safer driving maneuver than backing out onto heavily trafficked Flower Street. <br />Likewise, the people who are using the alley whose homes front on Heliotrope Drive <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.