5/5/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

F' g 0 5 992 BOOK 86 FACE V Several problems associated with the water and sewer connection matrix were described in the description section of this report. As indicated in that section, the matrix is difficult to understand and confusing. This lack of clarification has required staff interpretation and specific decisions in applying the matrix to different situations. Besides the clarification problem, various substantive issues have arisen with respect to the matrix. The matrix, as it is, will not capture all uses generating significant amounts of sewage and using significant amounts of water. Therefore, the matrix is not effective in achieving its principal purposes of preventing health problems, eliminating urban sprawl, controlling growth, encouraging infill development, and providing for the logical extension of utility services. To address this issue, the Professional Service Advisory Committee (PSAC) reviewed the connection matrix and considered the matrix's objectives. As -a result of its analysis, the PSAC determined that a flow threshold of 2000 gallons per day instead of a building area threshold of 5000 square feet would be more logical and rational. The new threshold is based on technical criteria for use of centralized and on-site systems. It is the position of the PSAC that a flow threshold will better identify those uses which should connect to a centralized system by recognizing use characteristics, as opposed to a strict square footage measure which does not address water and sewer consumption/generation. The County has several alternatives regarding the matrix. One is to take no action on this proposed change and not adopt the revised connection matrix. Another is to adopt this revised connection matrix. A third is to revise the matrix further. Policies 5.9 and 6.1 of the Sanitary Sewer and Potable Water Sub - Elements Policies 5.9 and 6.1 limit the use of centralized water and sewer systems to the urban service areas of the county. When the County adopted these two policies, the intent was to limit the utilization of centralized water and sewer systems to areas within the USA, since the area outside of the USA. is characterized by very low density development. However, as part of various plan amendments brought about by the county/DCA settlement agreement and by settlements with plan intervenors, the County adopted policies which require clustering of residential development within Agricultural Districts, Conservation Districts, and Mixed Use Districts. While this clustering of residential development will have a significant benefit in the protection of agricultural lands and preservation of environmentally sensitive lands, its usefulness will be restricted without the use of centralized water and sewer systems. Not only will such systems allow for more clustering (higher densities in smaller areas of a site), but such systems will also have a beneficial environmental effect on ground and surface water bodies. The County has initiated amendments to these two policies that provide the opportunity to use centralized utilities outside of the USA, if used for cluster development as required by policies of the Future Land Use Element. The County has several alternatives. One is to take no action on this proposed change and not adopt the revised policies 5.9 and 6.1. Another is to adopt revised policies 5.9 and 6.1. A third is to revise policies 5.9 and 6.1 further. Capital Improvements Element As- discussed in the description section of this report, the Capital Improvements Element must be revised annually to take into consideration changing circumstances, to consider new priorities, 126 I