Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutUntitledMinutes - City Council - 1957-04-04. :''..���~� '. City Council, Adjourned Meeting Office of the City Manager, City.Hall Redding, California � April 4, 1957 1:30 P. M. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Fleharty"with the following members present: Councilmen Holyfield, Kelly, Simons, Fleharty. Absent: Councilman Fulkerth;�� City Manager Cowden, City Attorney Cibula, Assistant City A.ttorney Ness, Director of Public Works Marron, Engineer pon Simpson and Director of Finance Pf�untner were also present. ��� RE TRUNK S�EWER POLICY Mr. Hal Marron submitted for council consi�deration suggestions regarding the method of financing trunk sewers, treatment plant facilities, and appurtenances, and suggested sewer service fees. � l / MOTION:. Made by Councilman Kelly, seconded by Councilman Simons that .�" 1 Resolution No. 2155 be�adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding establishing a policy for the extension and replacement flf a trunk sewer line. Voting was as follows: Ayes: Councilmen - Holyfield, Kelly, Simons and Fleharty ' , � Noes: Councilmeri - None . Absent: Councilmen - Fulkerth ' The Trunk Sewer Policy, submitted to councilmen and incorporated as a part of Resolution No�. 2155 is herewith printed in full: � ' 'I'RUNK SEWER POLICY ' � ,�� WHEREA5, it has been the policy of the Cit}r C�uncil of the City of Redding to finance the constructifln of ;sewer trunk lines, treatment plant facilities, and mechanical and other necessary appurtenarices to tlie City'��s . sewerage disposal system as they might be required, "~r3cla�,ting back to the Sewer Improvement Bond Issue of 1905, Ordinance #95, page 152 of the Old Ordinance b�ok, when, by special election on May 22, 1905, the citizens of the City of Redding approved the issuance of a $60., 000. 00 Bond Issue for ' enlarging, increasing, and improving the City's sewer system, and since it has been subsequent Councils' determiriation and polic}r to. contiriue the financing of such sewerage improvements, through the issuance of General Obligation Bonds, since that date, the City Council of the City of Redding has continued the same policy of financing the aforementioned improvements as may be now needed for the finaricing of sewerage ixnpr�ovements in Stage #1 � of the City's Maste'r Sewerage Plan in the� amount of $650, 000. 00. The City Council of the City of Redding, sin¢�e the tfltal amount of the impr�vements needed in Stage #1 is in�the amount of $850, 000. 00, has .determined to allocate a sum of $200, 000. 00 from capital improvemerit sales tax funds, and cash reserves, for the financing of the total improvements under Stage #1, with a further provision that an additional amount of $225, 000. 00 will be . pledged from capital improvement `sales�tax funds, and other cash resources of the City, towards the amortization of the $650, 000. 0�0 Bond issue during � the life of said Bonds. Tlie City C'ouncil of the City of Redding further ex- presses it's policy �f retiring all bonds, including interest payments, through. - an increase in the sewer service rental charges, sufficient to amortize the remainder of the Gene-rai .;L�,'�l'�igation Bond Issue. After the aforementioned new trunk sewers, and appropriate appurtenances ther�o proposed, to be financed through the sale of the � aforementioned General Obligation Bonds, have been constructed, the City � of Redding has no present plan far the financing of such additional sewerage facilities as may be required in the future growth and development of the City of Redding. 1 s�, ��. After the new trunk sew.ers, financed by the proposed bond issue, have ��� been�constructed'we �have no �finanaing plan for future development. �t there- fore becomes feasible to consider adoption of a plan -- which will allow for the sewering of areas be:yond the scope of the bond is.s.ue. --.in order to assure the continuation o.f this progressive step in Redding's dev�lopment. Definition of Terms � 1, LATERA'L:` A _sewer line with two or more house connections is a � � . � - , lateral - 2. COI�LECTOR:A sewer line which serves two or mo're`laterals is a collector. - � 3. TRUNK: A sewer line which serves two or more collectors is a trunk. • Trunk sewers, by the above definition,. serve a large area and therefore . ' it is felt that the City -s�liould adopt a policy to facilitate their constru�tion. Collector and lateral sewers are the responsibility of the property whi:eh they ' serve, and therefore=the--eost of tlieir construction should be borne b� said properties': , . _. _ _ - . _.,� : The propo'sed bond issue could be used to create a fund from which the cost of future"�trunk sewer extensioris would be finariced. ' � . A special�fund - " TRUNK SEWER EXTENSION AND REPLACEMENT FUlVD" shall be created, The monies to perpetuate this special fund shall cbme from all subsequent connections to the sewer system. The fee charged shall be based on the lot area, and paid 'irito the City fund which, in turn; will defray� , the c�st of_future extensions as' well� as replacements of trunk sewer::,`; All future connections to the sewer system shall pay the additional fee for one, or more, of the following reasons: l. In mflst cases these"��properties wi�Il not have paid a proportion�te ' share of the present sewer system. � Z. The value of these areas is 3mmediately enhanced by tlie avail- ability of a trunk sewer. 3. T.he properties benefiting from the improvements should be willing �� � to bear a greater share.:. of the cost. • By using a combination of-Sewer Service Charge funds and a p�rtion of the Sales Tax Revenue the p'roposed bond issue is to be •retired. By the establishment of the above-described special fund, a large percentage of the - monies collected fr�m the Sewer Rental Charge could eventually be released. These monies would th'en be used 'for the mainten:ance" and operation flf the entire sewer sy,stem, ther"eby leaving the general fund intact, The aim of this � program would be• the ultimate realization of a self-supporting sewer system. . . When the new areas connecting to the sewer system have been charged a fee as described, and this fee has gone into the special �fund -- "Txunk Sewer and Extension.and- Replacement Fund" -= the Council is then faced with the � - problem of formulating a policy in regard to future extensions. Such a policy would be set up as follows: I. EXTENSION OF TRUNK :SEWERS TO SERVE NEW SLTBDIVISIONS'��` � or ASSESSMENT DISTRICT5 a) . � When the area has paid the connection fee, the special fuiid should then be used to extend the trunk sewer ten feet for each-acre within said area, � � EXAIVIPLE":'" If ari area contained 500�acr`es, the`special fund would be used to finance a 5, 000-foot . . . � _ . - - "maximum exterision: � - � - b� : . . � � . � , .. Any extension of the trunk sewer beyond this distance would " � be the responsibility of the property owner or owners desiring service. � .� ��3�. II; EXTENSION OF TR.UNK SEWERS Z''HROUGH NEW SUBDIVISIONS �� / , . : , or ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS af _ Where �a trunk sewer passes through a subdivision or assessment. district, it may serve a dual role. In addition;ta be,ing a trunk , sewer,.,it may also b.ecome a collector for the'�subdivisio,n or assessment district through which it pa�sses, In this case, the special fund should be used to,,pay the difference in size . . between the collector, which is,-serving the subdivision or district.directly, .and the trunk,se.w.er as requi�ed by the, Trunk Sewer Master Plan. (NOTE: The trunk .sewer connection fee charged should be based on an average cost of trunk sewer extensions. The fee should be uniformly applied . to all areas. Due to topography and other .factors, there will be some areas where the cost of the extension may exceed the total collectible fees. In other areas, w.e .may find that the total c�llectible fees will exceed the cost of the extension. Through the establishme.nt of a uniform charge we not only gain facility in administration, but we eliminate the need for a justification of variation in levies that could result in the cumbersome task of attempting to define areas. ) . , Since the majority of the.new�areas will be residential in character, the fee to be assessed should most realistically be based on a unit of area. The basis and methfld of collection of the trunk sewer c�nnection fee shall, there- fore, be as follows: , 1. $200-per-acre based on the ne.t area, o,'r` , $150-per-xacre based on the gross area, ' . whichever is the lesser amount. , 2. The .fee shall be paid in advance of connecting . t� the trunk. t 3.. Lot areas and fees shall be determined by the Public Works Department. , The area.to be charged shall be defined as follows: - ' ,. � a) GROSS.AREA. - Entire parcel under one ownership includirng ' ,adjacent and interior dedicated streets and _ , alleys but excluding other. municipally-owned � land. b) NET AREA - Entire parcel under flne ownershi.p� excluding dedicated streets and alleys and other municipally- owned land. . 4. The basis for computing the above trunk sewer connection fees ;.�;.a�;::"�: shall be related to the ENGINEERING NEWS RECORD "Cost of Construction Index". Semi-annually, on January lst and July lst; the fee shall be adjusted proportionally to the variations of the � above index, ( RE SEWER SER.VIGE CHARGES , Director of Public Works, Hal Marron, submitted a suggested sewer rental schedule, however all action on this was deferred pending further study. Referred to the`Sewer`s and Finance Committees. There being no further busiriess, .it was moved by Cfluncilmari Kelly, secflnded - by Councilman Holyfield that the meeting be adjourned. The V�te: Unanimo s Aye s. , . • . APPROVED � � A test: - �M,�yor` ` ' � �e� � Ci .y Clerk .