|
||||
|
Mar. 22, 2001 By Gail Binkly The Cortez Sanitation District and developer Don Etnier reached a tentative compromise Tuesday night that might allow the Sedona Estates subdivision to be accepted into the district despite conflicts between property lines and sewer lines. After a lengthy discussion featuring a few testy exchanges between Etnier and district manager Bill Smith, the sanitation board voted 5-0 to table the issue until a special meeting Tuesday, April 3. Sedona Estates would consist of 55 lots for single-family mobile homes on 23.5 acres south of Cortez at the eastern end of Andrew Lane. The subdivision was approved by the Cortez City Council March 15 but cannot move forward until it is accepted for service by the sanitation district. Smith and district superintendent Jay Conner explained Tuesday that some of the property lines on Sedona Estates overlie existing sewer lines, which typically means that owners will put sheds, fences, trees and gardens over the pipes. This causes problems when sanitation-district workers have to maintain the pipes. Smith said he had had discussions about the problem with Etnier’s representatives since last fall and "it’s sort of fallen on deaf ears." He maintained that a 20-foot-wide "green belt" needed to be in place over two existing sewer lines and that lot lines should not extend into the green belt. Etnier had complained previously that the sanitation district didn’t think an easement would be satisfactory but also didn’t want to own the green belt outright. He told the Journal March 16 that Smith apparently had "some idea of utopia that the rest of us just don’t agree with." Referring to that comment, Smith said Tuesday his "view of utopia" is a situation "whereby we can actually get to our pipes to maintain them." Conner played a videotape showing problems in other areas of the district where fences and sheds placed within sewer-line easements make it difficult to reach pipes and manholes. In some cases, he said, it’s impossible for maintenance trucks to get anywhere near the pipes. Etnier asked what was the problem with simply having an easement for the pipes, the traditional arrangement for utility companies. "You just saw it," Smith replied. But Etnier said the problem was not his to solve. "You’re offering to the district a plan for a subdivision and it’s a district responsibility to make sure that’s an operational subdivision," said board member Bob Diederich. "You know as well as I do that easements are ignored by the property owner," especially after the lot has changed hands several times, he added. But Don’s wife, Gaylene, commented, "What you’re proposing is you’re going to prohibit anybody any time in the future from putting something on that land." "That’s a taking," Etnier said. "We’re not taking it," Smith said. "We’re suggesting you might give it to us." But he added that the sanitation district doesn’t want the land and would prefer Etnier deed it over to someone else, such as a homeowners association. "You’re still taking land, which means I no longer have the minimum lot size," Etnier argued. The land mass in total is counted toward the city’s square-footage requirements, and if he had to eliminate land from the development, it would cost him six or seven lots and a considerable amount of money, he said. He argued that all lines the development will install will be placed in streets, where they can easily be maintained, and that the only problem is with pipes that already exist. "We’re not changing anything," he said. "You’re putting property lines on the tops of them — that’s what’s changing," Smith said. Finally Etnier said that, as each lot was built, he would put up a chain-link fence on each lot exactly on the east boundary of the 20-foot easement to discourage anyone from erecting buildings or creating gardens over the sewer pipes. The board agreed to allow Etnier’s engineer, working with the district’s Conner, to survey the location of the existing pipes and see if that proposal would be viable. In other business Tuesday night: • Smith reported that the majority of customers, although a smaller percentage than usual, managed to pay their bills on time this quarter despite a new due date. In the past, the district’s quarterly bills were due on the final day of the quarter — i.e, on March 31, June 30 and so on. The district recently upped the due date by one month. • The board told Roy Crow of Pleasant View that, in order for him to claim the rights to any sewer taps that might have been purchased on four vacant lots at South Maple and West Third, he must show proof that the taps had been used in the past 10 years, by producing a receipt for either a sewer bill or a tap fee, the board said. Crow said the land had been vacant for years. • Board member G.W. Mc-Cutcheon raised concerns about the fact that the sanitation district has two different policies for refunding plant investment fees for taps purchased but not used. The district requires that buildings be constructed on lots within one year of the tap’s purchase, in order to discourage persons from buying and "hoarding" sewer taps. In areas served by the south plant, where taps are scarcer, the district refunds 80 percent of the tap fee, but the refund is 90 percent everywhere else. When no one could explain exactly how the difference could be justified, McCutcheon suggested the issue be studied at a future board meeting. |
||||
|
Copyright © 2001 the Cortez Journal.
All rights reserved. |
