My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2013-09-23 Closed and Regular
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2013
>
AgdaPkt 2013-09-23 Closed and Regular
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/29/2020 11:08:42 AM
Creation date
9/20/2013 9:10:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Regular
Agency Type
City Council
Date
9/23/2013
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.
/
751
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
8.A. - Page 311 <br />8.A. - Page 69 <br />Participants divided into three small groups facilitated by PCRC. Each group included area <br />residents, Laurel Way Project property owners and interested parties. Staff and Mr. Hamer <br />circulated among tables as resources. <br />GROUP <br />1. What do you like about the proposal? <br />e Positive that all neighbors get to know each other <br />c I have not gone to every meeting. If houses are 1500 square feet that would bring in <br />more young families to the neighborhood. Like the idea of young families <br />?. What Concerns you? <br />Not sure what the proposal is <br />o Don't like the Project <br />City does not maintain Highland Ave. This Project will make it worse <br />Problem is there is no proposal <br />d Confirms that City Council does not listen <br />Number 1 concern is stability of the land. Concerned about landslides <br />• Concmued about houses on .North side of cul de sac. <br />+ The EIR is difficult to understand, Is the EIR trustworthy? <br />* Issue of evaluation the credibility of the EIR <br />The wildlife has not been addressed. Only one day to say you didn't fiend the <br />endangered species <br />Road problem. Project will lead to more pot holes, more cars, more parking problems <br />Disruption during construction - 8 more years <br />Slump Iandside mentioned in the past <br />• Concern that land serves as a watershed. The runoff from I8 new homes adds more. <br />• If there is pressure on City to approve this because they receive revenue - that is not a <br />natural process. It is not right <br />3. How could your concerns be addressed? <br />Follow example - have two moderate size homes on three lots. Have homes that are <br />appropriate size for the conditions <br />Long term assurance for protection of their investment --their home. <br />As property owner, these are good questions <br />If people have questions, make sure they can get right information <br />Does not want meswge to provide "simple explanations" <br />• Impact on each homeowner different - but care about others as well <br />4. What additional information do you need about this proposal? <br />o Is there a control for speculation? If for young families may be more amenable <br />• How come the home owners are not joining in the group on the application? <br />+ If project is approved and later they have crakes in the house, who is responsible? <br />• If Japanese scale of earthquake - 9.0 - what will happen to the homes? <br />2of5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.