Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />• <br />Ccmft4A <br />CASE # 20 <br />REPORT FROM PUBLIC WORKS <br />By: Public Works Staff <br />Background: <br />The Public Works Committee met on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 and discussed the following <br />eight cases: <br />CITIZEN INPUT <br />Case #1 Green Valley Greenhouse Storm Water Utility Fee <br />Background: <br />The property owner John Rowe was present to discuss this issue. Staff stated that originally this <br />property had a homestead and a business on it, so there was a 50% credit for both rates for the <br />stone water utility fee. In 2004, the homestead was sold off and platted. Iii April of 2006, a <br />letter was sent to Mr. Rowe informing him that because of this change, the property no longer <br />qualified for the 50% credit. Mr. Rowe appealed this change and presented a plan to construct <br />ponding on the site which would make the property eligible for a credit. Aerial photos were <br />presented from 2003 and 2006 that showed a considerable increase in hard surface area on the <br />property. ' Staff stated that two construction seasons have passed and no pond has been <br />constructed. Staff is recommending that this property pay the full rate until the ponds are <br />constructed and credit can be granted. <br />Motion to recommend to the City Council that the appeal from Mr. Rowe be denied and the <br />property be billed at the new rate of $3,447.96 and the rate can be adjusted based on the credit <br />application. <br />Action: <br />Ratify the recommendation of the Public Works Committee. <br />Case #2 Water Meter Replacement Program <br />Background: <br />Staff presented a recommendation that a water meter replacement program be initiated over a <br />period of 15 years. It was proposed that the existing meters which include an outside read <br />mounted on the side of the dwelling unit be replaced with a radio read system which can be read <br />by driving through the neighborhood with a receiving unit. The Cominittee had recommended <br />that this program be accelerated to a period of approximately one half of this time frame, <br />between 6 to 7.5 years, if financially feasible. The Committee recommended that this item <br />should be a Case for the February 12, 2008 City Council meeting. However since that time of the <br />-119- <br />