Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, November 22, 2013, 9:11 AM
Town Square
Sinnott files lawsuit over driveway
Original post made on Nov 22, 2013
Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, November 22, 2013, 9:11 AM
Comments (8)
Like this comment
Posted by Mr. Anonymousa resident of Menlo Park: The Willows
on Nov 22, 2013 at 1:08 pm
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.
Like this comment
Posted by Sam Sinnotta resident of Menlo Park: Downtown
on Nov 22, 2013 at 3:28 pm
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.
Like this comment
Posted by POGOa resident of Woodside: other
on Nov 22, 2013 at 5:31 pm
This lawsuit was as predictable as the sunrise.
Like this comment
Posted by Long time MP residenta resident of Menlo Park: Sharon Heights
on Nov 23, 2013 at 8:13 pm
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.
Like this comment
Posted by lamea resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Nov 23, 2013 at 9:50 pm
Developer needs should always trump individual property rights. What are the neighbors smoking?
Like this comment
Posted by Dagwooda resident of Menlo Park: Downtown
on Nov 24, 2013 at 9:21 am
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'.
Like this comment
Posted by Development = Greeda resident of Menlo Park: Menlo Oaks
on Jan 3, 2014 at 7:42 am
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.]
Like this comment
Posted by pathetica resident of Menlo Park: other
on Jan 31, 2014 at 11:26 pm
[Post removed; personal attacks violate terms of use.]
Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.
Opening alert: Kyosho Sushi in Menlo Park
By Elena Kadvany | 0 comments | 1,430 views
Love is a Verb
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 1,023 views
Meet the winners!
The results are in. Check out The Almanac readers' favorite foods, services and fun stuff in the area.
