Laserfiche WebLink
7A <br /> � Page 39 <br /> LAW OFFICES <br /> i2QBERTJ.LANZONE AAR�NSON, DICKERS4N COHN & �ANZONE MICftAEIAARONSON <br /> JEAN B.SAVAREE y {t810•1998) <br /> MARC L.7AFFERANfl A PROFE5510NAL CORPQRATION <br /> • GREGORY J.RUBEN5 939 LAUREL STRE�T,SU1TE D KEI3NETH M.DICKER50N <br /> (1926-2488} <br /> LINDA J.I�OESKE* POST OF�IGE BOX 10fi5 <br /> �cgr���ea sp��,A��se,��m�ry iaw SAN CARLOS*CALIFC3RNIA 94070 MELViN E.COHN <br /> The Stete Ber ai Califamia (Superiar Court JuBgelRefired) <br /> Board of i.ega!5pecia�ization PHONE:650-593-3117' OF COUN5�L <br /> Fax:850-837-�aa� <br /> KATHLEEN A.KAWE www.adcl.COR1 <br /> KATE D.KOS7FixEWA �:h�.��,<n«Y���•:;•••;•»• <br /> y�«.�H1.�ww•:..i ' .. : <br /> •".1� �.."t. <br /> yJ ti.�. �, l.%� •�"�, �:i t <br /> f� <br /> ROBERT.l.LANZONE,EXt.204 � tl 'i ��� ��;�' ��f <br /> EmaiE: rianzone@adct,com �` j <br /> j �; �fAY `� �. �:CS�I� �,� <br /> May 21, 20�9 ' <br /> ^�"i�`��C#Y�'.1.��K�#:�1"i"Y <br /> 11,�2yo!' Ros�nne Foust <br /> City of Redwood City <br /> �edwood Lity City Hall <br /> 1017 Midd(efieid Road <br /> Redwood City, CA 94463 � <br /> Re: Finger Avenue 9 Lat Develvpmen#and Vesting Tentative IUMap <br /> Appeal of Planning Commissivn Denial of Project on IV(ay 19, 2448 <br /> Dear Mayor Fousf: <br /> This firm represents the developer of the above-refereneed project. It is <br /> described in the planning staff report as a 9-1ot planned development locafied at 50, 80, <br /> and 88 Finger Avenue, Redwood City. The associated applications consist of a planned <br /> development permit, Cordilleras Creek setback use permit and vesting tentative <br /> subdivision map. The project initially came to hearing on February '�0, 2�49 be#ore the <br /> Planning Commission. The matter was reset and heard by the Planning Comm{ssion on <br /> May 19, 2009, at which time and as its first action, approved the lnitiai Study and <br /> Mitigated Negative Declarafion (iS/MND} for the project. Dur assumption is that the <br /> action taken by the Planning Commission tv approve the ISIMND stands as acted upon <br /> and does nat need to be appealed. <br /> On May 19, 2009, the Planning Gommission denied the project consisting of the <br /> above described permits. The record of the Planning Commission's action is contained <br /> in #he associated Notice of Official Action which is presenfly being issued by the <br /> Planning Department. Please consider this letter fo be an appeal of the Planning <br /> Commission's action to deny the project. <br /> 7'he primary basis for the appeal is that the project which was recommended �or <br /> approval by the city staff merited approva[ by the Planning Commission. The <br /> development project went down on a 3�2 vo#e. It�+vas apparent at#he 111�ay 1 gth hearing. <br /> tnat t�e majori�y of commissioners did not reasonab�y and fully consider the record <br /> eviderce and recommended findings #hat would allow modification of the genera! 25- <br /> foot creek setback standard as provided for in the city's regulations. Commissioner Gee <br /> Q:1Attyslrj[1Rodi��c\roust.doc <br />