HomeMy WebLinkAboutAD 86-03; Medina, Constantino Jr; 1992-0538600; Assessment District Related DocumentRecording Requested by
Citv Clerk
and Return to: )
- ,. .6> i_
i n
120'0 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008
1 !a 5 i I Y .., (05~63 -0s'
STREET SUPERINTENDENT/TREASURER
DIVISION OF LAND AND ASSESSMENT llIMPROVEMENT ACT OF 1911" DIVISION 7, STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
REQUISITES OF APPLICATION
RESOLUTION OF INTENTION NO. NONE
IMPROVEMENT OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 86-3 Cynthia Lane Assessment District
APPLICATION:
The undersigned are all of the owners and intersected parties in that certain parcel of real property identified as Assessment No.
5 in that certain assessment diagram and roll issued for the improvement of the district designated as
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 86-3
pursuant to proceedings adopted by the governing body, which said assessment diagram and roll was recorded in the Office of the Superintendent of Streets. The undersigned hereby make this application to the Superintendent of Streets and the Treasurer for the division and modifications of the above mentioned assessment, and request that the unpaid balance of this assessment be apportioned to the present division of the property affected, and that the bonds be issued accordingly to each of the respective parcels, all pursuant to the provisions of Division 7 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California.
A description of original Assessment No. 5 is as shown on
Exhibit l1Att attached hereto.
The undersigned owners and interested person hereby request that the above described Assessment No. 5 be modified and improvement
bonds be issued accordingly to each of the respective parcels as shown hereon.
The within application of assessment modification is hereby made
because the original parcel assessed under Assessment No. 5 has
been divided.
(xiv)
.- -- -
.* . ,. .. I
DATE LEGAL OWNERS AND INTERESTED PARTIES
I hereby certify that the hereinabove application and consent for assessment
segregation and amended assessment was duly filed in my Office on the 5 +h
day of kptemby f?a. as follows:
I hereby reapportion said Assessment No. 5
New Segregated Additional Total
No. Description Bond Section 6458 Bond Bond
Assess. Legal Amount of Amount per New No.
19 Pcl 1, MS766 0
21 Pcl 3, MS766 10,869.11 10.00 10,879.11
22 Pcl 4, MS766 15,202.16 10.00 15,212.16
As legal owner of Assessment No. 5 , I hereby consent to the
modification of the assessment.
LEGAL ASSESSMENT AND BONDHOLDER
***
. 1456
4
5
I, the appointed SUPERINTENDENT OF STREETS, submit herewith the following “Report:
for approval and final confirmation, and do hereby set for the total costs and expenses of the
improvements and assess said costs against the parcels within the boundaries of the Assessment
District in direct proportion to the benefits received.
15 6-230-42 26,285 SO
156-230-49 26,071.27
The costs to be assessed are set forth as follows with a detailed breakdown on the following
pages:
9
10
I. CONSTRUCTION ............................. $161,600.19 .
II. INCIDENTAL EXPENSES .......................... 65.425.50
IV. CONTRIBUTION ................................ 18,883.98
V. BALANCE TO ASSESSMENT ....................... 208,141.71
III. TOTAL CONSTRUCTION AND INCIDENTAL EXPENSES .... 227,025.69
156-230-60 32,112.44
156-230-62 0.00
The parcels and properties to be assessed are generally set forth as follows:
1 I 156-230-37 I $ 0.00 11 II 2 0.00 II II 3 I 156-230-41 I 26,256.96 11
II 6 I 156-230-50 I 26,007.00 11
II 7 I 156-230-52 I 25,921.31 11 I1 8 I 156-230-59 I 19,708.77 11
11 156-230-63 13,024.92
12 156-230-64 12,853.54
The district costs have been spread to each parcel in relation to the benefits received. This has
been based on the front footage of each parcel in accordance with previous presentations to the
City Council.
The three parcels receiving a zero assessment have exercised their option to construct the
improvement themselves and thus the City’s contractor did not complete any work along those
parcels. A portion of the cost to initiate the District and to prepare the plans, however,
benefitted these parcels. This cost ($18,883.98) has been shown as a City contribution to the
district. This "contribution" is offset by permit fees which were paid by the three property
owners who completed their own frontage improvements.
1458
1 ) ss.
COUNTY OF )
said State, personally appeared Cons tantino Medina Jr .
STATE OF CALIFORNIA sm DIEm 1' On July 29. 1989 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for
I
proved lo me on the basis of
satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s)
@re subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged
to me thaeshefihey executed the same.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
OFFICIAL SEAL
Notary Public-California
Principal Office In San Diego County
BETTY L. WEBER
Conm Exp. Mar. 29, 1991
(This area for official notarial seal)
SF-4234 (REV A. 7/82) (CA) (IN&IDVAL)