CC MIN 03-24- to 05-21-1981 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

9 Jack Murray (see above) urged that Council recommend that staff develop a fee schedule which will realistically build what is to be built; and is sure that under the present Council, bonds are not going to be issued, and that future Councils will take the same position that there will be no bonds issued unless the people there vote in their favor. Gregg Doran (see above) referred to the reports and comments made by Mr. Warren and City Manager Fales regarding Redwood Peninsula and South Shores, and suggested that in the fee schedule in the letter from Redwood Shores, Inc. , if South Shores is eliminated from that schedule, there is a surplus of $8 million by 1993, so that if they want to develop South Shores there should be two separate schedules. City Manager Fales pointed out that the agreement has been discussed as indicated in his report to Council, with Redwood Shores, Inc. and with the Advisory Committee, but that it is far from complete; that it is his suggestion that the two parts be separated within one agreement, because there are many reasons that Pond A-12 would be good financially for the District; also, he hoped that all who are involved seriously in considering the material that has been developed realize that when discussing what something will cost in 1987, that it be taken in the context of the economy in a common sense application of what can be done now as it impacts anything thirty days from now, let alone in 1987; that the agreement will build a process into the relationships between the developer and the District and reality that will continually monitor what happens, and as we get closer to 1987, more will be known of what will be required, what the economy has done to development schedules, and to costs of improvements. Gus Pappas (see above) referred to his engineering background, and A"4 Mr. Pales' comments, and agreed with the proposal of a periodic review, but that in view of the volatile economic situation, it should be done every six months, rather than annually. Discussion by Council continued regarding the fact that comments from the audience implied that it is definite that no future bonds would be voted by this Council; that individual Members have expressed the idea that they are concerned that bonds not be proposed without the vote of the people, but that this is too much an absolute, particularly in view of the fact that there will be future Councils. People who have purchased property in Redwood Shores recently do not have the benefit that people who bought earlier, of the fact that bonding made it possible for them to have the opportunity to buy into an important community development with a great many amenities, because of the fact that the bonding concept was there. Appreciation and inflation, among other things, have caused the later buyers to pay a higher fee, but for future development that in the long run will enhance the value of the Shores projects, the fee structure must be such that it will not hamper development. ADDITION TO MOTION: Britschgi/ that no additional building permits be issued in Redwood Shores until a fee schedule is developed. Motion died for lack of a second. MOTION AGAIN RESTATED: At the request of Mayor Biagi, City Attorney Schricker restated the original motion and additions, to direct staff to prepare a fee schedule for a facilities charge for construction on Redwood Peninsula, and that the facilities charge would distinguish between residential and commercial property; that a development contact would be prepared for the implementation of the facilities charge and the construction of facilities; that South Shores would Adi.Mtg. 5/21/81 Page 5 I, •