Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOB 3 PUBLIC ALLEY VAC 01-02-90DATE: DECEMBER 21, 1989 TO: WILLIAM HUSTON, CITY MANAGER OLD BUSINESS NO. 3 1-2-90 Inter - Com FROM: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT/ENGINEERING DIVISION SUBJECT: PUBLIC ALLEY ABANDONMENT/VACATION RECOMMENDATION: Pleasure of the City Council. BACKGROUND: The discussion pertaining to the abandonment/vacation of the public alley located southerly of Linda Lane, easterly of Yorba Street and westerly of Rosalind Drive was agendized for the City Council meeting of October 16, 1989. At that meeting, Mr. Ralph Westrum requested that the item be continued to a later date. The previous staff report dated October 6, 1989 has been attached for ,the City Council's reference. .jISCUSSION: In the previous staff report dated October 6, 1989, it was noted that nine responses to the letter questionnaire had been received as follows: * In favor of the proposed abandonment/vacation ofthe alley ........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 * Opposed to the proposed abandonment/vacation ofthe alley ....................................... 6 * No response ........................................ 3 Total 12 On October 13, 1989, one additional response was received in opposition to the proposed abandonment/vacation, changing the results to 3, 7 and 2 for those in favor, opposed, and no response, respectively. X0.2 Bob Ledendec r Director of ubli Works/City Engineer : my DATE: OCTOBER 6, 1989 TO: WILLIAM HUSTON, CITY MANAGER Inter - Com FROM: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT/ENGINEERING DIVISION SUBJECT: PUBLIC ALLEY ABANDONMENT/VACATION RECOMMENDATION: That the subject alley remain as a public facility which would require no action by the City Council. BACKGROUND: At their meeting of September 5, 1989, the City Council discussed the potential abandonment/vacation of a public alley located southerly of Linda Lane, easterly of Yorba Street and westerly -of Rosalind Drive. As a part of this discussion, staff was directed to send a letter question- naire to the twelve affected property owners abutting the subject alle.Y to determine their preference regarding the subject alley abandonment/ _vacation. A copy of the letter and questionnaire is attached for the ity Council's reference. These letters were mailed on September 14, 1989 with a response date of -o later than October 4, 1989. DISCUSSION: As of 5:00 p.m. October 4, 1989, nine responses have been received as follows: * In favor of the proposed abandonment/vacation ofthe alley ...................................... 3 * Opposed to the proposed abandonment/vacation ofthe alley ...................................... 6 * No response ....................................... 3 Total 12 Following are comments which accompanied two of the questionnaires opposing the abandonment/vacation of the.alley. * Only if the "no parking" signs are removed. We have lived here over 20 of the 27 years without "no parking" signs in the alley. * Not all homes backed to the alley need to use it for access to their garage. This would be unfair to them. Do you think there should be "no parking" signs on one side of the alley way? Preferably the west side. PUBLIC ALLEY ABANDONMENT/VACATION OCTOBER 6, 1989 PAGE 2 Attached for the City Council's reference is a copy of the previous staff report dated August 29, 1989. Bob Ledendecker Director of Public Works/City Engineer BL:mv Attach. September 14, 1989 AP No. 395-264-03 Mr. Roger C. Treichler 17552 Laurie Lane Tustin, CA 92680 Re Public Alley Abandonment/Vacation Dear Mr. Treichler: Depti-1111011 of hiblic Wurk:VEiiXiarrrhjg At the Tustin City Council meeting held on September 5, 1989, the council discussed the potential abandonment/vacation of a public alley located southerly of Linda Lane, easterly of Yorba Street and westerly of Rosalind Drive. As a part of this discussion, staff was directed to end a letter questionnaire to the twelve property owners abutting the .abject-alley'to determine their preference as to whether the alley should be abandoned/vacated or left in its current condition as a public alley. ,.,i the event the. alley would be abandoned/vacated, 'each abutting property owner would assume ownership to the centerline of the alley and would be responsible for the maintenance of that portion of the alley. Also, reciprocal easements between each of the abutting property owners would have to be executed so that access could be maintained for each property utilizing the alley for access to their garage structures or backyard areas. It is* requested 'that each property owner respond to the attached questionnaire below by returning one copy marked with their response either in favor of, or opposed to, the proposed abandonment/vacation of the alley located southerly of Linda Lane, easterly of Yorba Street and - westerly of Rosalind Drive. A self-addressed and stamped envelope has been included for your convenience. It is requested thatour res o be returned no later.than Wednesda Y,.October 4, 1989. Y p nse .. In the event there are any questions. regarding this. questionnaire please call either'Monda Buckley (544-8890, ext. 292) or me at 544-8890, ext. 281. Very truly yours, Bob Ledendecker C actor of Public Works/City 300 Cetilennial Wray . Engineer Tustio, Califuniiu 92680 . (7] 1) 811-8890 AP 395-264-03 Roger C. Treichler 17552 Laurie Lane' Tustin, cA 92680 QUESTIONNAIRE I, we, are in favor of the Proposed abandon the alley'southerly of Linda Lane, abandonment/vacation of [_] I, we,_•• are• opposed -to the proposed abando the alley southerly of Linda Lane. nment/vacation of Comments: DATE: AUGUST 29, 1989 Inter - Com TO: WILLIAM HUSTON, CITY MANAGER FROM: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT/ENGINEERING DIVISION SUBJECT: CITIZEN COMPLAINT -'ALLEY SOUTHERLY OF LINDA LANE AND EASTERLY OF YORBA STREET AND REMOVAL OF STREET SWEEPING SIGNS ON WESTERLY SIDE OF YORBA STREET RECOMMENDATION; , Receive and file. No action will allow "no parking" restrictions'to remain in effect. BACKGROUND:- At ACKGROUND; At the August 21, 1989 city council meeting, a concern was raised by Mr.. Ralph Westrum, 13651 Rosalind Drive, regarding the status of the alley lying southerly of Linda Lane and westerly of Yorba Street. 'alley is delineated on the attached portion of a copy of Tract Map No. 4014 marked as attachment A. Also attached and marked as attachments $, C, D and E are copies of deeds for Lots 27, 31, 32 and'361 respectively.. Mr. Westrum,Is. concern involved the prohibition of parking within the alley and whether the alley was either a public or private facility. - DISCUSSION; i review of the original Tract Map No. 4014 (reference Attachment A) shows the alley to be a separate facility and not a part of Any ;,,Of.- the twelve lots adjoining the alley. Attachments 81 C,D.and E are copies of deeds to four lots Nos. 27, 31, 32 and 36. These deeds do not reflect.' any. ownership of any part of the alley.. Staff reviewed only four deeds'' out of a total of twelve lots abutting the alley but considers theme as ` being representative of all affected lots with respect to ownership of the alley. If the alley was under private ownership,there would be some type of an easement document granting access across each of the private pro erties to the owners of all lots located•southerly of Lots 31 and 32. Staff was unable to locate any such easement document and attachments B, C, D and E contain no language to that effect. .As a result of the above-mentioned review, it is staff's opinion th the subject alley is a public alley: -- - p ..... at Section 5332F of the Tustin City Code provides for the following: No person shall stop, stand or park a vehicle for any purpose other than loading or unloading of persons, materials in any public or dedicated alley and any private alley as stipulated by special ordinance. L CITIZEN COMPLAINT - ALLEY SOUTHERLY OF LINDA LANE EASTERLY OF YO RHA AND REMOVAL OF STREET SWEEPING SIGNS, WILY SIDE OF YORBA AUGUST 29, 1989 . PAGE 2 Unless this, code,- is modified by the city council, the existing "No Parking Anytime".signs within the alley -should remain in place and unbagged to prohibit parking on both sides of the alley. As previously discussed, the alley in question 'is twenty (20) feet in width. If parking were to be allowed on both sides of the alley 'and vehicles were parked opposite each -other, the alley -could be blocked for through access. The Orange County Fire Department indicated that alleys should have a clear minimum width of twenty (20) feet, an all-weather surface, and a clear vertical clearance of 1316" per. Section 10209 t of the Uniform Fire Code. As a result of this requirement, it is recommended that -the "no parking" restrictions, on both sides of the alley remain in effect within the subject public alley. The subject of abandonment of" the alley surfaced at the last city council meeting and is a possible solution with concurrence of. all .of the residents. It. ..the..___&lle_y were. to be abandoned, • the following are some areas that should be resolved prior to commencement of 'the abandonment proceedings: 1. Concurrence from the twelve (12) affected property owners that they desire said abandonment. 2. Willingness from all the affected property owners to grant reciprocal„ access... easements to each of -the affected property owners. 3. Review and comm..ent.from the Orange.County Fire Department and other agencies providing emergency services that such an abandon- ment would not impede their ability to provide services to the affected properties. Once it has been determined that the alley abandonment would be formall initiated, the following procedures are required: y Week one - City council adopts a resolution of intention to vacate the alley and sets time and place for a publicdon/ hearing. Week five - City -council holds public hearing, receives'testimony on proposed abandonment and takes an action based upon testimony received. CITIZEN COMPLAINT - ALLEY SOUTHERLY OF LINDA LAN.9, F.!I,X OF YORBA STREET AND REMOVAL OF STREET- SWEEPING SIGNS, W11LY SIDE OF YORBA AUGUST 29, 1989 PAGE 3 Attached for the city council's information is a copy of a letter sent to Mr. Westrum regarding the removal of "No Parking During Street Sweeping Hours" signs on the westerly side of Yorb" Street. As you will note, the petition presented by Mr. Westrum* at the August 21, 1989 meeting contained a handwritten addition for the west side of Yorba but no signatures of property owners adjacent to the west side either for or against said sign removal. ... Bob Ledendecker • Director of Public Works/City Engineer my It • 1 �� '� . 1 AP No. 395-264-08 Mr. Ralph J. Westrum 13651 Rosalind Drive Tustin, CA 92680 QUESTIONNAIRE FO SLP 'fUS1111 PU133LIC 1'W[U•S DIER I, we, are in favor of the proposed abandonment/vacation of the alley southerly of L,iinnd, a Lane. ' �� we, are opposed to the proposed abandonment/vacation of the alley southerly of Linda Lane. Comments: AP No. 395-264-07 (13671 Rosalind Drive, Tustin, CA) Mr. Michael Stone 9612 Bryn Mar Drive Villa Park, CA 92667 QUESTIONNAIRE MD �2�0n U 0 SEP [USIIN PUQLIC'YOW DEP -(7Z I we are in favor of the proposed abandonment/vacation of the alley southerly of Linda Lane. I, we, are opposed to the proposed abandonment/vacation of the alley'southerly of Linda Lane. Comments: G AP No. 395-264-11 13682 Yo �'Lg Lg D EP 8198 Mr. Michael Stone ' ,� rba Street, Tustin, CA) 9612 Bryn Mar Drive rUST1M DUD, Villa Park, CA 92667 "IC VVOW DEPT QUESTIONNAIRE I, we, are in favor of the proposed abandonment/vacation of the alley southerly of Linda Lane.. I, we, are opposed to the Proposed-abandonment/vacation of the alley southerly of Linda Lane. Comments: AP No. 395-264-13 (13702 Yorba St., Tustin, CA) La Jolla Trust Company Attn: Trust Department P.O. Box 22508 San Diego, CA 92680 QUES`T'IONNAIRE tl � bu [1J"IM PWILIC fti,hS UEP1. I, we, are in favor of the proposed abandonment/vacation of the alley southerly of Linda Lane. I, we, are opposed to the proposed abandonment/vacation of the alley southerly of Linda Lane. -Comments: AP No. 395-264-12 Mr. William D. Flynn 13692 Yorba Street Tustin, CA 92680 �v Comments: U" SEP 1 � 1989 �usun Fuuuc woeKs u01. QUESTIONNAIRE I, we, are in favor of the proposed abandonment/vacation of the alley southerly of Linda Lane. I, we, are opposed to the proposed abandonment/vacation of the alley southerly Linda Lane. -� AP 395-264-03 Roger C. Treichler 17552 Laurie Lane Tustin, CA, 92680 QUESTIONNAIRE S 0� lUSllhl PUWLIC (1 I, I, we, are in favor of the proposed abandonment/vacation of the alley southerly of Linda Lane. I, we, are opposed to the proposed abandonment/vacation of the alley southerly of Linda Lane. -'omments : AP No. 395-264-06 (13681 Rosalind) Mr. John D. Chaconas 10522 Grove Oak Dr Santa Ana, CA 92705 —.. QUESTIONNAIRE OCT 0 19i5ig TUSTIN PUBLIC N'OICItS BCI''(. [� I, we, are in favor of the proposed. abandonment/vacation of the alley southerly of Linda Lane. I, we, are opposed to the proposed abandonment/vacation of the alley southerly of Linda Lane. .:omments f •M A? No. 395-264-04 Mr. Hugh T. Jones 13701 Rosalind Drive Tustin, CA 92680 QUESTIONNAIRE _ D O v'. v +) 1989 C� I, we,•are-in favor of the proposed abandonment/vacation of the alley southerly of Linda Lane. I, we, are opposed to the proposed abandonment/vacation of the alley southerly of Linda Lane. -Comments: k 36 + • Iw • J • • Lei . • � - ivORKS Ur°1. XP No. 395-264-14 (13712 Yorba St., Tustin, CA) De Air Saying and an A s'n. 3 tZ, a L22 2 ars S et rr c T r C L l% G :, QUESTIONNAIRE 1, we, are in favor of the proposed abandonment/vacation of the alley'southerly of Linda Lane. I. we, are opposed to the proposed abandonment/vacation of .the alley southerly of Linda Lane. 772�Comments: