02-26-1990 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

to decide it after a significant amount of litigation. Issue #2 - Process - The process that was undertaken on the Crystal Bay project was one in which although the City had discussed a contribution, the City undertook the following steps: 1. Hold the public hearing 2. Adopt the project 3. Adopt the assessment 4. Allow the 30 day appeal process 5. Have the Courts determine the benefit to the properties (and hence the amount of City contribution) As an alternative process in the Stubbs Bay area a revised process is suggested to limit the City's risk in two ways: a. Avoid the possibly non-recoverab1e undertaking the plans, specifications process (which is approximately $20,000 getting a committment to the project by a majority of the people in the area, prior plans and specs. expense of and bidding -$30,000) by substantial to ordering b. Limit the risk of substantial appeal waivers by: 1. Minimizing the actual assessment to an amount similar to the amount determined by the Court for the Crystal Bay project, with the balance being a connection charge. 2. Not ordering the project until the i isk of appeals has been quantified. A proposed process to do this are a follows: 1. Project Petition - Send out a letter which contains the petition and a special waiver. 2. Plans and specifications - Awalc receipt of upwards of 7(1% appea'" waivers. TF a lesser amount is received and it appears that few, if any additional ones are coming in that it be reconsidered by Council to analyze the risk and determine if they want to go ahead with the plans and specification expenditure. If the project does not go ahead the City funds that expense. 3. Code Enforcement - As an optional step council could consider further restrictive development controls in the area as to expansion of homes related to both zoning and septic together with giving a deadline for all those with failing or severely nonconforming systems to go on holding tanks. I