2007-07-20 TSamson - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

YUEN:The amounts paid should definitely be credited. But my recommendation is the amounts due are calculated according to the current fair share contribution schedule. So the amounts paid will not cover the units that they were paid for. LIM:It’s our understanding based upon the correspondence that the County had agreed to that scenario; and we’re willing to follow through with that. YUEN:Well, this is a time extension. LIM:That’s correct. YUEN:As a condition of the time extension I would say, even projects, for example, that did not have fair share assessments on them when the original zoning went through, they’ve been adding that as a zoning requirement on the time extension. So that’s to create a uniform requirement for projects that are essentially being reauthorized. So, of course, it’s fair to credit the sums actually paid; but to say that you remain at the level of assessment that was calculated 10 or 15 years ago, I would not agree to that. LIM:Can we agree to having 24 of the units being paid for the park assessment at least? We have, you know, letters from the County saying this is the number and you paid $50,000 up front and $50,000 later, so we would at least like to get credit for 24 units. YUEN:I don’t recommend that. I think it should be, you’re getting a time extension and it should be reassessed accordingly to the current standard. LIMEven though there are agreements, letters from the County? YUEN:You’re getting the time extension. WATANABE:Okay, now that we have clarification on the staff’s position as to whether there’s -. YUEN:And then I also, the affordable housing, do you have a copy of the resolution? LIM:I don’t think I have it with me but it was Resolution No. 90 from the County Housing Agency. So I think that’s consistent with the current practice. It’s that if we had gone to the Council to authorize the payment of in-lieu fees, and we did for 48 units and we paid that, I think we should be satisfied for the 48 units at least. YUEN:I’d have to see the terms of the Council Resolution authorizing the payment of in-lieu fees. I’m not inclined to accept that, again, for the same reason that this is a time extension. If this were a project that did not need a time extension and you had covered the units by paying the in-lieu fee, we would honor that according to the ordinance that was passed in 2005; but this is a time extension. But before I make my own final recommendation on that, I would like to see what the resolution says. WATANABE:Mr. Graham? EXHIBIT B 7