SU0004272 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Minutes 13 April 19, 2005 Corral Hollow Road and Larch Road, and Clover Road west of the current City limit and south of 1-205 indicating their interest in annexation. 3. The City could consider a single application from those property owners who want to annex. This alternative would likely include property owners who don't want to annex in order to have a map that makes geographic sense, but the annexation would have to be structured to ensure that the protest would not be more than 25% of the registered voters. 4. The City could consider individual annexation requests upon application. A key factor in how the City proceeds is how San Joaquin County wishes to proceed with regard to future annexations in the Larch Clover area. On April 8, 2005, Mayor Bilbrey and City staff met with Supervisor Leroy Ornallas to discuss the options. The conclusion reached was that, with the concurrence of the City Council, the City would respond to requests for annexation from property owners, but not on a parcel-by-parcel basis. There would not be a City initiated effort. The actual shape of the annexation area(s) could be irregular depending on which owners propose to annex. Basically, the "ends" of the Larch Clover area, and possibly the south side of 1-205 are considered the most likely areas for annexation as noted above. With City Council's concurrence, staff would send a letter to property owners and conduct a meeting to inform the property owners of the proposed approach, and to determine which property owners are interested in annexation. It will also be necessary to discuss alternative approaches to any funding of infrastructure capacity and analysis and the establishment of impact fees for the entire area. Following the meeting, property owners would then notify the City in writing that they are interested in annexation. Once that is completed, staff will map the area, meet with LAFCO staff to review the options, and report back to the Council. There is one outstanding issue that cannot be resolved at this time. As a part of the district formation, the City committed to provide water (one Equivalent Consumer Unit) upon payment of fees to vacant parcels upon annexation. The failure of the annexation application and the delay of the construction of the sewer line leave this commitment in limbo. To provide water to new users outside the City, the City and County would have to amend the existing agreement or develop a new agreement. Currently, the County is not allowing the use of septic systems in the area. Therefore, even if the Council was amenable to modifying the previous policy with regard to the provision of water, there would be no way for two small places of worship that are proposing to build to proceed with construction. The County will review the potential of allowing temporary sewer solutions, so this issue may need to be revisited in the future. Council Member Tolbert requested information on the infrastructure relevant to annexing individual parcels. Mr. Reeds responded no development would be able to proceed until an infrastructure analysis and fee establishment occurred for the entire area. If there is a large enough group wishing to annex, it is possible the group could get together and do the infrastructure studies. The