O-2004-1168-B - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

. . REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested: Appropriation Requested By: Source of Funds: N/A Department: Account Number: N/A Report: X Resolution: Ordinance: Amount Budgeted: NI A Amount Requested: N/A Exbibits: 1. Council Agenda Item and Back-up From November 10, 2003 (Exbibit A) Memo from Robert Cummings witb Cost Estimates and Diagrams Budgeted Item: YES NO 2. SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION At the last meeting of City Council, staffwas requested to provide additional information on Mr. Gray's request for a water well. As a brief background, Mr. Gray owns property north of the railroad adjacent to SH225 frontage road and Strang Road. No water is available at the site. Water and sewer is available within 500 feet, but would require boring under the railroad. Across Strang is a non-conforming well serving a trucking facility. See Exhibit A for last City Council meeting's packet material. Since the last meeting, several options were explored: 1.) Tying onto Mr. Angel's non-conforming well across Strang Road: Mr. Gray has stated he bas Mr. Angel's approval and is in the process of obtaining an agreement. However, Section 1168-A of the Code of Ordinances, which prohibits the drilling of new wells, also prohibits any selling, bartering, or giving away of water. So, while this is considered better than drilling a new well, it is prohibited by ordinance. A modification would need to be made to the ordinance to allow such an agreement. 2.) Allowing wells to be drilled where the City does not have water available within 500 feet: There are numerous tracts, both small and large acreage that would fit into this category (several tracts cut-off by major roadways or railroad line that would require boring). To change the ordinance to allow wells when water is not within 500 feet, the City could see numerous requests for wells. 3.) City staff explored extending water and sewer to the site. City staff viewed two routes as being viable due to right-of-way and proximity. The longer route would benefit two property owners (four tracts, not including the railroad property) at a cost of$91,251.80. Ifwater only were considered, it would be roughly $31,000. With a sewer bore for future sanitary sewer, it would be under $50,000 ($25,000 per landowner). This would require permits from the railroad for borings and crossing their line. The City could participate by perfonning this work at a cost of roughly $10,000 less than the $50,000 to include the waterline, tire hydrant, and bore for future sanitary sewer. The attached memo from Robert Cummings, Supervising Engineer, outlines the various estimates and routes for extension of water and sewer lines. Action Required bv Council: This is a workshop item. Staff would like direction as to how to proceed with Mr. Gray's request. J;] -3-03 Date .