My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
RDA Min 1994-12-05
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Minutes
>
Redevelopment
>
1990-1999
>
1994
>
RDA Min 1994-12-05
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/5/2005 2:39:02 PM
Creation date
3/29/2004 10:54:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
Redevelopment
Date
12/5/1994
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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 /> improvement costs, but I think that Max's on its own exceeds $1.2 million in the total tenant <br /> improvement costs. So that was what the Agency got in terms of the DDA. In terms of the <br /> mechanics of the $300,000, if the project doesn't throw off $300,000 in tax increment in any given <br /> year which it will not in the first few years, the City who is also a signator to the DDA, provides up <br /> to 50% of the sales tax ttom the project to supplement the $300,000. If both those sources together <br /> do not meet the $300,000 then that's all the developer gets. If in anyone year he doesn't reach <br /> $300,000 the debt doesn't continue over into the next year. It doesn't roll over, it's lost. It does <br /> appear that the project given the success that it has generated will in fact produce $300,000 in <br /> combined property taxes, sales tax. The final map on the project was only recorded in mid- <br /> November, and the County Assessor at this point has yet to basically map the area, value the land of <br /> improvements. So we don't know at this point what the final County assessed value of the project <br /> is. So until we have those final numbers from the County Assessor we don't know how much <br /> property tax increment the project will generate. Therefore we won't know how much sales tax is <br /> likely to be involved. That's the general shape of the deal. The City's other contribution to the <br /> project was this parcel of land here. It was the parking lot on which there was at one point a <br /> temporary fire station. So that's the essential shape of the Sequoia Station deal. That covers it so <br /> we'll move on. <br /> MINUTE BOOK NO. 52 <br /> Page No. 234 Redevelopment Agency Joint Study Session Minutes <br /> December 5, 1994 <br /> Page 9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.