My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2009-05-18
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009 partial
>
2009
>
AgdaPkt 2009-05-18
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/17/2009 9:30:58 AM
Creation date
5/14/2009 4:02:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Special
Agency Type
City Council and Redevelopment Agency
Date
5/18/2009
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.
/
349
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
<br />. \ <br />.....l <br /> <br />. " ) <br /> <br />6.1F <br />Page 8 <br /> <br />Reimbursement agreements are approved only after conducting proceedings <br />similar to assessment district proceedings. Also reimbursement agreements <br />usually involve the construction of improvements, not just preparation of an <br />EIR. Finally, approval of such an agreement is subject to a majority protest by <br />landowners which, if made, must be overridden by the Council by a 4/5th vote. <br /> <br />TRADITIONAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT <br /> <br />The CitY could pay up front for the EIR while establishing an assessment <br />district. The assessment district would issue bonds, the proceeds of which <br />would reimburse the City for the EIR costs and could also ultimately pay for the <br />roadway improvements. The issuance costs (approx. $50,000) associated with a <br />relatively small amount of bonds make this option impractical unless the <br />construction of street improvements is also involved. <br /> <br />SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT <br /> <br />The City pays up front for the EIR. Instead of issuing bonds through an <br />assessment district, the City would establish a special improvement district and <br />advance costs for the EIR. Each property owner within the district would then <br />have to pay back the City via an additional assessment on their tax rolls. <br /> <br />Costs associated with such a district would approximate those forming a <br />traditional assessment district. <br /> <br />Such a district is subject to a majority protest by landowners which, if made, <br />must be overridden by Council by a 4/5th vote. <br /> <br />VOLUNTARY AGREEMENT <br /> <br />This option is similar to that proposed by the owner of 3738 Laurel Way during <br />the appeal of the denial of his application for variances. If the Council desires, <br />this agreement could include the City as a contributing party but would not <br />guarantee development approval since development could only be approved <br />in accordance with the zoning ordinance and any adopted mitigation measures <br />in the fIR. <br /> <br />Since this is a voluntary agreement, owners of unimproved lots (who would <br />presumably benefit from the EIR) could be invited to share in the cost of the <br />EIR. Those owners who expect to develop these properties in the near future <br />would benefit from spreading the cost over all the vacant lots, and should be <br />motivated to participate to the extent no one owner wants to bear the entire <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.