10/24/1988 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e the annexation. Current surveys indicate that such an annexation might be overturned in an election. This option would require a high level of activity over several months on the part of staff and the City Council, as well as a large-scale public information program to ensure that the public is well informed. Economy of scale could be achieved if the sewer system was installed as a whole over a period of four to five years. 2. Change current City policies to allow the construction of a sewer system in the River Road/Santa Clara area prior to annexation. Mr. Holmer asked if the first option could be engineered to allow an incre- mental annexation by quarters, thus allowing a concerted effort to package and sell the program. Ms. Brody said there would be difficulty in selecting and defining the areas, but this was an option that could be considered. Gary Chenkin, Planning Department, pointed out that the option of proceeding with one fourth of the area at a time would probably result in remonstrance elections in each quarter. Responding to Mayor Obie's question, Mr. Smith said the gross cost for sewers for all the River Road area would be approximately $30 million. Additional private costs would average $1,200 per household. Emphasizing that there is a strong public policy purpose behind the present program, Ms. Brody said the second option may not make the most planning sense; it also raises significant inter-jurisdictional issues that would have e to be addressed; however, it may be the only practical solution, given the current political opposition to annexation. Ms. Brody also said the second option would raise significant urbanization issues (e.g., if development were to occur as a result of the increased sewer services). Responding to Mr. Miller's questions, Ms. Brody said the hook-up schedule affects the residential and some of the commercial areas of River Road, but the industrial area along Highway 99 does not move the City towards its hook- up schedule. If the second option were selected, it would carry the recom- mendation that areas that do not help meet the hook-up schedule should not be allowed to take advantage of the sewer installation. Ms. Brody noted that allowing an area to develop before annexation occurs is desirable if revenue is the primary consideration. She said a contract annexation would require property owners to annex in the future, but State law does not allow that guarantee without a legislative solution. Mr. Rutan observed that reviewing the process in its entirety may produce discussion that will lead to a better strategy. He suggested exploring the option of finding a way to transfer responsibility for the existing problem to another jurisdiction. Ms. Wooten disagreed with Mr. Rutan's suggestion and said the City has a responsibility to resolve the situation. She envisioned a solution that would focus on encouraging residents to pay for the services that are neces- sary for urbanization. e MINUTES--City Council October 24, 1988 Page 4 Work Session