Laserfiche WebLink
Administrator at the hearing stated that the fire hydrant proposed was a private <br /> hydrant and was not in the road but on the site of 747 Southview Way so that the <br /> water line down the easement was OK in his opinion and was willing to ignore the <br /> coun~ regulations, the Water Department requirements, the town of Woodside <br /> regulation and the requests of all of the residents of Southview Way and their concern <br /> about safety so that an oversized home could be built for the pleasure of My. Farahyar <br /> and his architect. Mr. Farahyar is planning on a private water line through his <br /> backyard while at the same time agreeing to accept matching public funds for a <br /> project that was approved because he agreed to a water line extension in the street. <br /> <br /> I talked to Charles Csicsma~ about the water line and explained that I had many <br /> conversations with water set ~zes over the years and had been referred to Steve <br /> Mtichum and others. In every case I was told the water line must go down the street <br /> and a f~re hydrant must be in the stree~ at most 500' form the new development. Mx. <br /> Csiscman told me he was unaware of any such regulation, and he told me that Steve <br /> Mitchum was just a lower level maintenance technician and was probably in error. <br /> <br /> I plan on suing in the courts to stop this development if basic County. guidelines, the <br /> past policy of the Water Services as witnessed and documented by myself and <br /> another resident of the street, the requirements of the Town of Woodside, the written <br /> and oral agreement by Ma- Farahyar, and the safety of the residents concerning the <br /> water line in the road and the remediation of the bottleneck are not followed. <br /> Southview Way is in a semi-rural hillside area with exposure to extreme fire danger at <br /> times. Why are the basic regulations being circumvented? Why are written and oral <br /> agreements being ignored? How did this process occur without proper notification of <br /> the nearby residents? Why has there not been a public hearing on these crucial <br /> matters? <br /> <br />4. I have expressed in writing my opposition to the lot line adjustment. This letter to Jill <br /> Ekas is on file since October 11, 2001 and I will not reiterate all of my concerns here. <br /> I was told at this hearing that the Lot Line Adjustment had already been approved. <br /> This was inconsistent with the Notice, and The Lot Line adjustment requires a public <br /> hearing by the City Council after recommendation by thePlarming Commission. I <br /> have not been given notice of such a Public Hearing. If it has been approved than it is <br /> illegal since the lot line adjustment must include a public hearing by the City Council. <br /> In addition the adjustment was made without proper notification and due process. <br /> <br /> The project at 747 Southview Way required the adjustment so that a oversized <br /> home could be constructed in an area that will seriously impact my property value, <br /> the environment and the neighborhood.. Mr. Farahyar lad presented the home to be <br /> built as fitting in with the neighborhood, stating to me it was about 3800 square feet, <br /> and in a different location and size when he lobbied me to help support his effort for <br /> the road improvement. In my opinion Mr. Farahyar is disingenuous in his attempts <br /> and appears to do anything, and is willing to mislead his neighbors and government <br /> planners to accomplish this large development project at any cost and with disregard <br /> m regulations and the neighborhood. Why was the annexing of street frontage <br /> <br /> <br />