My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2014-07-28 Closed, Special and Joint SA
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2014
>
AgdaPkt 2014-07-28 Closed, Special and Joint SA
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/30/2014 9:34:48 AM
Creation date
7/24/2014 3:03:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
City Council and Successor Agency
Date
7/28/2014
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
409
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
7.2.D. - Page 5 <br /> January 11, 2014 • 6±b 2 1 2014 –� <br /> Yung Le CITY us rtr_uvvOOD cIyy <br /> PLANNING SERVICES <br /> 961 Bryant Way —� <br /> Sunnyvale CA, 94087 <br /> Re: Sidewalk Improvement Condition – Alameda De Las Pulgas <br /> To the City Council of Redwood City: <br /> My family recently purchased the lots on 353/355 Alameda De Las Pulgas in hopes of <br /> building our dream homes in Redwood City. However, we ran into a roadblock with a <br /> mandated condition to improve 1200 feet of public sidewalk in order to make our dream <br /> a reality. <br /> Per the City's Community Development Department, this condition stems from an <br /> annexation approval in 2008 (Project No. ZM 2006 -02), involving multiple properties. <br /> Since the annexation approval was unclear, the city states the first property owner to seek <br /> a permit (in this case, my family) will be responsible for the improvements and therefore <br /> the costs. 1 am requesting to amend the requirement mandated on my family. Our bases <br /> to ask for the city's consideration are as below: <br /> 1) Holding the first property owner to seek a permit responsible for the improvement is a <br /> rule artificially set with no written agreement of such criterion. <br /> 2) As part of the annexation, the agreement holds multiple properties responsible, not the <br /> first property owner to seek a permit. <br /> 3) The contingency is preventing the properties from being sold and improved upon, <br /> which hurts the neighborhood and the city in the long run. <br /> 4) Our family is unfairly, over - burdened with the public improvements outside the scope <br /> of our parcel. The burden not only includes cost (estimated at $200,000), but also <br /> liability and coordination that make building our homes economically unfeasible. <br /> Due to the reasons citied above, we ask the City Council to permit our family to build our <br /> homes free of this requirement. Without delaying construction, we are also willing to <br /> corporate with the city and/or the properties citied in the annexation on options to <br /> improve the sidewalk that are amenable to all parties involved. <br /> My family and I thank you for your consideration and understanding on this matter. We <br /> hope that our request is fair and valid to warrant an amendment from the City Council. <br /> Sincerely, <br /> Yung Le <br /> (408) 893 -8270 <br /> yungsle@a gmalcom <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.