Laserfiche WebLink
- Allow properties regardless of geographic location, to connect to the County utility <br />ss stem (Option 2) <br />This is a radical option. With this alternative, the urban service area would be meaningless. If any <br />property could connect to the County utility system, there would be no limit on the extension of <br />water and sewer lines in rural and agricultural areas. From a growth management perspective, that <br />would sever the relationship between the existence of utility services and the allowance of higher <br />densities. With centralized water and or sewer service outside of the Urban Service Area, there <br />would be more justification for land use plan changes to allow higher densities. <br />From a utility expansion perspective, this option would adversely affect utility system planning, <br />demand forecasting, and capital improvements programming. This alternative would also result in <br />higher costs and poorer water quality. <br />While this alternative would resolve the 66th Avenue issue by allowing residents to connect to <br />County water, it would expand that allowance to anyone anywhere in the County. That would <br />effectively negate the function and benefit of the Urban Service Area. <br />- Allow properties abutting or within a specified distance of a County installed water <br />line to connect to the County utility system (Option 3) <br />This option is a logical extension of the County's current exemptions that allow certain properties <br />located outside of the USA to connect to the County utility system. Similar to the current allowance <br />(W for properties outside of but contiguous to the USA boundary to connect to County utilities, this <br />alternative would recognize that, because a utility line is already in place, adjacent properties could <br />connect to the line without further expansion of the utility system. <br />By allowing properties adjacent to existing utility lines to connect to the County water system, this <br />alternative would resolve the 66th Avenue issue. Because connections would be made to an existing <br />utility line, this alternative would not result in some of the higher costs and poorer water quality <br />issues that would occur with Option 2 above. <br />CONCLUSION <br />Over the years, the existing County Urban Service Area policies have worked well. Those policies <br />have been the basis of growth management and utility expansion decisions in the past. As such, the <br />current USA policies are appropriate to maintain. <br />To address the 66th Avenue water connection issue, the Board can take a global approach by adopting <br />Option 2, allowing any property to connect to the County utility system, approach, or it can take a <br />more narrow Option 3, allowing only properties adjacent to an existing utility line to connect, <br />approach. As referenced above, Option 2 is more problematic, since it will impact growth <br />management, affect utility planning, increase utility costs, and result in poor water quality. For those <br />reasons, Option 2 should not be selected. <br />FACommunity Development\Users\CDADMEVRAGENDA\2013\WaterconnectionoutsideUSA 071613.doc 5 167 <br />