Laserfiche WebLink
8.A. - Page 93 <br /> i� ...,, Page 11 <br /> � .�� � �s <br /> � � deveIopm�rtt on Laurel Way. At �at tirne Cauncil atso d' <br /> mechanisms #'or ftu�ding the EiR, wit!► the possibili of the �� staff to explore altemative <br /> � ` tY �ty contribu#ing a purtion of <br /> the EIR costs, Senror Pjacaner Passanisi referced to thc alt�rnatives Iisted in the re�ort at� <br /> st.a.ted that sta#�` �cam�ended a vo�untary agreement. FaIlowing is an excerpt fram #he <br /> � staffrepc�rt: <br /> "Valuntary Agreemen�. This opt�on is similar to that p�roposed by the avvner of 3738 <br /> �� Laurel Way d�ring tt�e appeal of the deniat of his application fnr variances. If the Counci� <br /> k� desiires, th.is agre.�ment could inclnd� the Cit�y as a contributin <br /> � � � p�y but would not <br /> �� guararttee develo�me�tt appr�val since developmet�t cauld anly be approved in accardance <br /> �` �vith the zoning ardrnance and any arlapted miligation measures in the EIR, <br /> � "5ince #his is a voluntnry agreem�n#, owners of c�r�rnproved lots who w�uf <br /> � benefit frnm the EIR} cot�ld be �.nv�tec� to share in the cast of the EIR. Those owners h <br /> expect to develop thes� prope�es in the neaz fixture wouid beriefit from s re <br /> � over all the vacant lots, and shauld be mo�ivated to part,icipate to the extent n one own� <br /> war�ts to bear the eritire cost. <br /> "Of a�1 t�te types o� finar�cing meck�anisms, �tafi' beIieves f.hat #he voltuttazy agreement <br /> would be t�e best, p�ssibly u�th � city can#ribtation. It is tI�e simples� artd l�ast <br /> cumbersome to administer. �f the City Cout�cil decides to pay for a porkion of the EIR <br /> cost, then t,b�e cantrib�.ti�n shou�d be basec� on the perce�.tage of #otal pubiic right of way <br /> within the Laurei Way 5ubdivisian..." (aFprQxicnateIy 1 S% �r $14,400 if the EIR costs <br /> $SU,OU�.) <br /> M�yor �I�: tne� �sked if anyone in t�e attdience wishe� to s�eak to tEus assue. Na one <br /> came fnxw�rd. <br /> In response tu Cottncil quest�ans, S��tiar Pl�n�ner Passanisi exp�ain�d t�at if o�y ana <br /> P�o��' owner chose tc> enfer a� agreement far an E�R the� he/she would be solely <br /> responsible far its funding (unless #�e City chose t� participate up to t�e i g��a level.) If no <br /> on� chase ta �urs�e an EIR then the City wo�td not expend any mon�y. Senior Planner <br /> Passanisi said ar�mini�ative costs were not �cluded in the $S0,(300 estimate. <br /> M/5: CLAIRE/BU�HAN TD AT�PROVE STAFF RECOMMt�;NDATtpN FOR A VOLUNTARY <br /> EFFO.RT TO PRQDUCE AN EIR WITH CITY PARTICIPATION �F APPR07QMATELY <br /> $�4,4U0,1� CITY°S FAIR SHARE. <br /> After Courtci� disc�ssion regarding a. fxed coutiribution and the percentage of total p�hiic <br /> rig�t of way, the Mat��r a.�d Seconder agreed to annend the s�.bject I�Eation to read: <br /> M��: ��LAIRE/�i1CHAN TO APPR.C)VE STAFF R$COI��jATION '�OR A <br /> VOLUNTARY �FFQRT TO PRDDUCE AN EIR WITH CITY �Al�'zTCIPATION OF A <br /> MAXfMI]M OF 18 PERCENT �PERC�NTA�E OF TQTAL pU$LIC RIGH7' OF WA'Y <br /> WITHIN THE I,.AiJREI., WhY' SiTBDNiS��Nj <br /> REGULAR COUNCIL, lV1�ET'INCi <br /> MINUT'FS � OC'COHER 28, I415 <br /> PAGE 14 <br />