Laserfiche WebLink
APR - :Z9 -03 TUE 04_09 PM ROGER FLORES CO 41513652150 <br />ent 8y: Planning 8 Redev. ; 650 780 0126; <br />Apr -25.03 16:29; <br />'�•I• 3P <br />19 April 2 2003 <br />'ally 111aaror oll I <br />lust" =: Roger r F lor es <br />' <br />549 Palomar Drive <br />Redwood City, CA 94062 <br />P_02 <br />Page 111 <br />COMMUNITY RE: 37 Laur w <br />DEVELOPMENT Dear Mr, Flores, <br />SERVICES - The City of Redwood City Pian Review Committee (PRA) met April '%" <br />to review your submittal for an Architectural Permit for a new 4.018 squ <br />PLANNING & foot single family home on a vacant 9,713 square foot parcel. The property <br />is located in the Residential Hillside (RH) Zoning District. The PRC and <br />R[DEVELOPM[NT Planning sta - <br />co <br />appli% atian. nducted 6 sitE vlSlt and discussed various asp:rccs Of yz)ur <br />017 Middlefield <br />The PRC group and the Zoning Administrator have determined that the <br />application is not <br />U 3 <br />c omplete, nor does the Proposed development conform to <br />a significant number <br />�o <br />aa- ico d C it y <br />of City StanOards. However, those issues are not <br />specificaliy addressed in this letter since the <br />4 9df1Fi4 -0391 <br />most fundamental deficiency In <br />your application Is that you have not submitted <br />;x (ii5ei tsaAIR <br />Report (EIR an Environmental Impact <br />pursuant to City Council policy established in 1988 wit <br />amendments in 2000. <br />D f6E�; 781! u1z4 <br />As you are aware Laurel way is <br />s nstariaarc� - ) Qnlflcantl <br />�� tltilltics a not readily av ailable to man <br />v.teJ <br />Laurel Way; and the remaining vacant rc is on Laurel Wa pa rce ls <br />9, <br />r clud ng 38 <br />Laurel Way) have significant slopes <br />p � `tarn ' <br />bla; lket2d with - lati ve v �� _ , unst&e soils. and are <br />Ths1 ; ` g2 Lon and WWLIr nj heritage oak trees <br />tOh i <br />. <br />and many others, require thou rev throu,ih the <br />ro Itludi gh <br />analysis included in an EIR. It is <br />ROPPf1EpT <br />the Zoning Administrators opinion that <br />jurtncr Staff review of this <br />ProjQct cannon be made without submittal of an <br />EIP„ <br />PIed52 call ,m IT y0U have anv questions about the Cit t.0uncil's policy <br />L for <br />c?vlopment <br />cn La�cr °I Way and /or the City's Plan >:e,,fa��, <br />Clornmrttee prcic�,.. <br />Slncer °i.,. <br />1('ili�G <br />sill D12ver - r <br />G I;q - <br />781.7Y34 <br />�on1r1c kJrrr at . <br />•' V <br />VL.OPtalElgi Opp . -i�' Attorney <br />?N -M3 cngrneerin9 and Construction Services Manag <br />Pl e; <br />anning ;Qrvices Manager <br />