My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2006-07-24
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009 partial
>
2006
>
AgdaPkt 2006-07-24
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/15/2006 9:21:49 AM
Creation date
7/20/2006 1:07:25 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Date
7/24/2006
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.
/
474
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
<br />7A <br />Page 6 <br /> <br />For those properties where removal of the improvement is required a significant amount of <br />staff time, from a code enforcement perspective, would be required; however, the property <br />owners would bear the expense of the removal. It is not known what those costs would be <br />depending on the severity. <br /> <br />At present no fees have been suggested for the processing of an Encroachment <br />Agreement for the direct purpose of encouraging property owners to participate willingly <br />and in a timely manner. However, given the staff time involved in processing the <br />Encroachment Agreement (anticipated to be between 1 to 3 hours depending on whether a <br />site visit is necessary) this cost may have to be subsidized by the General Fund.6 A <br />suggestion for offsetting an ongoing cost would be to provide a grace period for submittals <br />(i.e. six months). Once the grace period has expired the City could then charge a fee for <br />the actual staff time to process an Encroachment Agreement. <br /> <br />The other potential fiscal impact to the City, as discussed in the Study Session. relates to <br />slope failure. If slope failure were to occur as a result of Illegal construction on the lagoon <br />. bank;thefiscal impact to the City and affected property owners would be significant. Given <br />the existing build-out of the Redwood Shores community it would be extremely difficult to <br />get the necessary machinery in to re-compact the lagoon bank. The possibility also exists <br />that the lagoon would need to be drained in order to do the necessary work. Any cost <br />estimates would need to reflect the degree of failure that occurred and the amount of work <br />necessary. <br /> <br />Conclusion <br />The City has yet to address the growing concern of non-permitted (illegal) improvements <br />on waterfront properties in the Redwood Shores community. Implementation of the <br />Redwood Shores Lagoon Bank Policy would establish a set of construction guidelines and <br />a procedure for future improvements which would work to preserve the integrity of the <br />lagoon bank both structurally and aesthetically. <br /> <br />City staff is requesting that the City Council consider adoption of the Redwood Shores <br />Lagoon Bank Policy and Construction Guidelines and the removal and/or modification of <br />~ imp~emenls that have been iden as structurally significa ~ <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />~Iake L\IOIl ~ Joel Patterson <br />Associate PI nner tor, Community Development <br /> <br /> <br />Attachments <br /> <br />1. Draft Redwood Shores Lagoon Bank Policy and Construction Guidelines (June <br />2005) <br />2. Sample Encroachment Agreement <br />3. Photographic Examples <br />4. Minutes from the February 13,2006 City Council Study Session <br /> <br /> <br />6 Planning Staff currently bills at $126.65 per hour (2006-2007 rate will be $130.37 per hour) <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.