Did Sinnott receive the permit before buying the investment property? I assume one must own the property first, which to me means that he has no claim to losing $500K in value.

A quick clarification for anonymous - the vehicular access to Louise has always existed. A dirt driveway from my property over the unpaved portion to the paved portion of Louise existed for most of the history of Louise Street. I purchased the property with that access. We have used the access and not been sighted. That use included vehicles driving through the double driveway gates that probably date back to the 1930's. The previous owner of my property has submitted a sworn affidavit that he too used the driveway before it was blocked by the neighbors installation of their private parking without any required permits. They have since been forced to remove the parking.

The encroachment permit was needed only to pave the driveway, not to establish its existence. A similar permit was granted in 1984. These permits are never subject to a public hearing.

By proceeding with the abandonment the City is attempting to eliminate a vehicular access that exists. This taking without compensation is part of the basis for the $500,000 claim.

This lawsuit was as predictable as the sunrise.

Good luck Sam. It is great that the neighbors have agreed to indemnify the city. If they want to eliminate your right to a driveway, then they can pay you the $500,000 plus your legal fees. I think one of the neighbors just gave/sold their lot to their children. I hope the parents are indemnifying their children.

Developer needs should always trump individual property rights. What are the neighbors smoking?

There must be a hidden connection here to John Woodell, Chuck Bernstein and Virginia Kiraly. Or maybe not so hidden, just the perpetual embarrassment machine that is Menlo Park. Btw, Sam means to write 'cited', as in 'citation,' not 'sighted'.

Dagwood,
Were you at the last City Council meeting on the topic? I was terrible - nearly every council member fell over themselves to essentially remind Sinnott to sue the city because the City had been indemnified. As you indicate - yet another pathetic showing for the elected officials in Menlo Park. [Portion removed; stay on topic and keep it civil.]

[Post removed; personal attacks violate terms of use.]