My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1976 01 20
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1976 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1976 01 20
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:09 PM
Creation date
8/28/2009 3:01:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
1/20/1976
Original Hardcopy Storage
7C3
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1976 01 20
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />WATER & SANITATION <br />SERVICE AGREEMENT <br />PROPOSED MIZEL ANNEXATION <br /> <br />Mr. Wurl stated that there were several <br />changes on the wording of the agreement which <br />needed to be revised. <br />Attorney Morris stated that both the City and <br />Mr. Mizel would like to have the agreement <br />approved to enter into before the final <br />action on the Mizel Annexation. <br />Attorney Morris stated that the purpose of <br />the agreement is for the protection of the <br />City as well as developer of the property. <br />Mr. Houlehan elaborated on the discussion <br />stating that the reason for the agreement <br />is to incorporate the provisions of an <br />earlier annexation agreement. Mr. Houlehan <br />stated that the reason the developer wanted <br />to enter into the water and sanitation agree- <br />ment is to have advanced understanding where <br />water and sewer mains would enter the devel- <br />opment, who would be putting up the funds <br />and when the developer puts in an oversized <br />main what would be the means of recapturing <br />the cost. <br />For the protection of the City oversized <br />mains would be put in that would meet <br />future needs. <br />Councilman DelPizzo asked Mr. Houlehan what <br />was meant by a surcharge to help repay <br />the developer. <br />Mr. Houlehan stated that this meant that the <br />developer will be paying for mains and <br />since they will be oversized, at the time of <br />a tap a surcharge would be added to help <br />repay the developer for the actual cost <br />of constructing the main. <br />Councilman Caranci asked what happens to the <br />water rights on property which may not be <br />built upon due to hazards. <br />Mr. Houlehan stated that he did not have <br />a definite answer on the question,at this <br />time. <br />Councilman Carancil also asked if the City <br />will be responsible for paying the storage <br />on the water rights until that water is <br />changed from agriculture and the land <br />is developed. <br />Mr. Houlehan stated that it would not be <br />the developers intention to have the City <br />pay for the storage until they had use of <br />the water. <br />Councilman DiCarlo stated that he did not <br />feel all shares of Farmers R & I were in- <br />cluded in the agreement. <br />Mr. Wurl stated that the staff has been <br />trying to establish the amount of water <br />shares which go with various parts of <br />property. <br /> <br />-6- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.