My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2011-08-22
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2011
>
AgdaPkt 2011-08-22
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2012 12:02:59 PM
Creation date
8/18/2011 4:39:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
City Council and Redevelopment Agency
Date
8/22/2011
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.
/
456
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 89 � <br /> ° � � Page 7 <br /> This balance of $65,60Q could khen be equally dis�ributed over the tota123 <br /> vacant lots on Laurel Way which wo�Id resu�t in $2850 per lot. <br /> This option direc�y benefits #he property owners since the City makes an irutia.l <br /> �ontributian up fron�, thereby reducing thE propert� awner's contribution to <br /> the �II�. Also, this opfion allows the City �a make its "Fa�r share" eoniribution <br /> based on the land area it will hold in the Laurel Way Subdivision {th� public <br /> right-of-way). Hvwever, as with every reimbursement agreement, there ar� <br /> cerfain long and cumbexsome proceedin�s that must oc�ur, and there is no <br /> guararitee that the EIR will be completed sinc� the reimbursement agr�ment is <br /> subject to a majorit�► prate�t, which can be overrider� by Cauncil by a 4/5th vote. <br /> Possible Ci#v Share: Ovtinn #2 <br /> 'I'he City may �lso elect to sp�it the cos� of the �TR in half and pay $4D,Dq0. <br /> Under such a scen�r�o, Fhe property owners of the 23 vacant ��ts would pay <br /> about $174Q per ldt. <br /> This option provides a greater benefit �o the property owners, although #he Cit�r <br /> puts rYtore money up front at risk and may be pay�r�g more than its fair share. <br /> Possibie Citv Share: Dvfion #3 and #4 <br /> The Ci�y could atso decide ta pay none Qr a�1 of the EIR cost�. If the Cfty chose <br /> not to rontribute any funds, i.e. the vacant property owners wa�d be <br /> responsible for the entire $8D,p00 cost, and then the assessment would be $3480 <br /> per vacant lot. <br /> 'Y'he paymen# options are summariz�d in the following table: <br /> Citv Pavs� Provertv Owners Es#i.mated EIR �ost <br /> (?_3 VaCant Lots) <br /> $0 $80,O�f0 {$348�/1ot) $St).�i10 <br /> ���,4oa ��,�oo ��zs���oc) �so,aoa <br /> �o,aoo �o,000 c�l�4o�%�� �so,o�o <br /> �so,aoo �o �so,000 <br /> Z Casts do not includ� City's administrative costs whic5 usually n:n anywhere <br /> frarn IO% to 20�'0 of E[R cost, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.