RDA Min 1992-06-08 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

II II ,. ~nt Agency Attorney Schricker advised the Agency Board of irectors to consider each property separately. Redevelopment Agency Attorney Hildebrand responded to the letter sent - by the attorney for Mr. A. H. Davis, Exhibit 2, letter from Charles G. Riff of Ropers, Majeski, Kohn, Bentley, Wagner & Kane dated June 5, 1992 addressed to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Redwood City: 1. Mr. Davies does not agree that the price per square foot offered of $24 is the fair market value. Mr. Hildebrand advised this hearing is not the proper forum in which to address the value questions. The value of the property can be further negotiated or in a trial if it ensues. 2. Mr. Davies does not agree with the City's determination of the square footage involved. The City's square footage does not include approximately 6,000 square feet of property under an abandoned easement. Mr. Hildebrand advised there is a question of property interests of about 6,000 square feet in a crescent shape at the eastern side of the parcel involved. Mr. Hildebrand advised that the Agency, by this hearing and action, does indeed intend to acquire and include the 6,000 square feet including the crescent shaped area. The value is, again to be determined through negotiation or by a court at the proper time. In response to Council questions, Mr. Hildebrand advised the area to be taken is the underlying fee of Franklin - Street which is 70 feet wide and extends from Jefferson Street to the northerly boundary of the parcel talked about here, the entire hatchmarked portion of Franklin Street, the underlying fee plus the area hatchmarked to the north and east of the street. 3. Mr. Davies does not agree that the City has the right to condemn his property for parking for the Safeway and longs Drug Shopping Center in that it doesn't meet the elements of public use and necessity required for condemnation. Further, any public use will interfere with current private uses. Mr. Hildebrand advised that the Redevelopment Agency is the condemnor, not the City. Mr. Hildebrand advised that parking is but one element of this project that Mr. Church had just summarized and given the full background of the need and necessity issue which the Council will determine tonight. 4. Mr. Davies contends that by taking the property in question and by reutilizing Franklin Street adjacent to his property with diagonal parking that he will loose (sic) valuable access and turnaround space for parking of cars at the Chevrolet dealership. Redevelopment Agency Minutes June,8, 1992 Page 5 - MINUTE BOOK NO.1 Page No,65