7/27/1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

however, other mechanisms by which service can be provided to land adjacent to roadways serving as utility corridors. o Alternatives With respect to this issue, there are several alternatives available to the Board of County Commissioners. Each has advantages and disadvantages. In the staff report submitted to the Board of County Commissioners for the June 22, 1993 meeting, five alternatives for addressing the utility corridor issue were identified. Besides a no action option, there were four alternatives involving various combinations of urban service area expansion and land use plan map redesignation. The attached memorandum which was presented to the Board at its June 22, 1993 meeting contains an analysis of each alternative. As indicated in the attached staff report for the June 22, 1993 meeting, staff had recommended the alternative of enlarging the urban service area by 2280 acres and redesignating that land from AG -1 to R. Staff still supports that recommendation (see attachment 1). Although the attached staff report addresses the corridor issue from the perspective of USA and land use designation boundary changes, there is another set of options which could resolve the issue. These options involve changing USA related policies. Specifically, these options involve modifying the prohibition on extension of urban services outside of the USA boundary. Since urban service areas are not mandated by the state, a revision to the county's USA policies would not conflict with state law. If, however, such policy changes would result in urban sprawl, then the state could object to any such revisions. Of the 700+ policies of the comprehensive plan, only two prohibit extension of water and sewer services outside of the USA. These are policies 5.9 of the Potable Water Sub -Element and 5.9 of the Sanitary Sewer Sub -Element. While various other plan policies relate to the urban service area, no other policies prohibit the extension of urban services outside of the USA. By modifying the two referenced policies, the issue of providing utility service to land adjacent to roadways serving as urban service area boundaries where those roads also accommodate major utility lines can be resolved. Such changes to the two policies could be either broad or narrow in scope. A broad change to policy 5.9 of the Potable Water Sub -Element and to policy 5.9 of the Sanitary Sewer Sub -Element would delete the prohibition of extending service outside of the USA and would not limit service extension at all. With such a change, water and sewer service could be provided anywhere in the County. Although such a change would provide complete flexibility to the Board, it would eliminate the guidance provided by the comprehensive plan for utility master planning. It also would have a tendency to create urban sprawl through the extension of utility services into rural and agricultural areas. Instead of making a broad change to policy 5.9, the Board could make a more narrowly designed revision. For example, the Board could revise policy 5.9 to allow expansion of utility services outside of the USA only for those parcels located wholly or partly within one quarter of a mile of the urban service area boundary 15 L2JUL 800K �' E 5 21q5{