My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2013-09-23 Closed and Regular
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2013
>
AgdaPkt 2013-09-23 Closed and Regular
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/29/2020 11:08:42 AM
Creation date
9/20/2013 9:10:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Regular
Agency Type
City Council
Date
9/23/2013
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.
/
751
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 332 <br />8.A. - Page 90 8.1 F <br />Page 8 <br />Reimbursenust agreements am approved only after aonducdng pyoceeftV <br />similar to assessment district proceedings,. Also Mn bas its <br />usually involve the consonxtion of improvemmts, not fust preparation of an <br />EM Finally, approval of such an agreement is subject to a majority Sows t by <br />landowners which, if made;, must be overridden by the Coundl by a. 4/&h vole. <br />TItADTTIDNAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT <br />The City could pay up front for the FMt while establishing an assessment <br />dislria The assessment disitIct would issue bonds, the proceeds of whkh <br />would reimburse the ally for the Elit costs and could also ultimately pay for the <br />roadway ts. The issuance oasts (app mx A04) amoeiated with a <br />relatively small amount of bonds m%W this optim mpractical untess the <br />aansumcdon of street Irnprovemeats is also iinvWved. <br />�. .rlk � i•s �� �:: �y <br />The City pays, up front fab the WL Instead of Issuing bonds through an <br />assessment district, the City would establish a special improvement district and <br />advance amts for the EUL Each property owner within the district would am <br />have to Fay back the City via an additional. asses smenat on their tax rolls. <br />Costs associated with such a district would approximate those fiamirg a <br />traditional assessment districL <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 />VOLUNTARY ACRE MSNT <br />Thb oPdon is similar to *At proposed by the owner of =8 Laurel Way during <br />the appeal of the denial of his application foe vadumm If the Council dam, <br />this went could include the City as a contributing party btpt mid xW <br />guarantee deoeiopment approval since dnWopment could only be approval <br />in accordance with the zoning ordinance and any adopted mffigntion mcasures <br />in the ETR. <br />Since this is a t OIUIttary went; owners of unimproved lots (who would <br />presumably benefit hem the BW could be Invited to share in the oast of the <br />EIR. Three owners who expect in develop these properties in the near future <br />would benedt from spreading the cost over all the vacant Iota, 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.