Laserfiche WebLink
/? <br />TO: <br />FROM: <br />DATE: <br />SUBJECT: <br />Mayor and City Council <br />Ron Moorse, City Administrator <br />September 4, 1992 <br />a/ <br />/f <br />Ofi0:" <br />Lee and Julie Harren Request for Exclusion From Stubbs <br />Bay Sewer Project <br />Attachment: A, Letter to the Barren's Dated 8/17/92 <br />Lee and Julie Harren have filed an appeal concerning the Stubbs <br />Bay project related to the issue of exclusion from the project. <br />They believe they meet all the exclusion criteria and have asked <br />for an opportunity to make their case to the Council. <br />Exclusion Criteria Background <br />Initially there were no exclusion criteria related to the <br />project. All properties in the project were included. When <br />property owners began calling CounciImembers with assorted <br />arguments for exclusion. Council asked staff to develop criteria <br />for exclusion. One criterion indicates that if a sewer line <br />which serves an upstream property abutts a property which <br />otherwise would be excluded, that property is then included. <br />This is the criterion the Harrens believe has been incorrectly <br />applied to them. <br />The Harrens believe that because the sewer line, as currently <br />proposed, does not directly abut their property they technically <br />meet the exclusion criteria. It has been staff's position that <br />this technicality does not invalidate the inclusion. In <br />addition, based on the intent and spirit of the exclusion <br />criteria and based on the relationship of this property to the <br />project area, the property should be included in the project. <br />From the standpoint of serving this property with sewer the <br />exclusion issue is not critical because it would be relatively <br />easy to serve this property at sometime in the future. However, <br />from the standpoint of consistency in applying the exclusion <br />criteria, providing the exclusion to the Harrens could generate <br />additional exclusion requests. It may be difficult to convince <br />other property owners that this is a valid exclusion. <br />1