Laserfiche WebLink
Honorable Mayor and City Council <br />February 14, 1996 <br />Page Two <br /> <br />There was a question regarding the cost to the homeowner for running services <br />from the property line to their home, and the filling and abandonment of the <br />existing septic tank. A member of the audience volunteered that the utilities would <br />cost approximately $15 per foot for both sewer and water, and approximately <br />$150-$200 for abandonment of the existing septic tank. He also added that, in <br />most cases, connection to the municipal sewer would require breaking up of the <br />basement floor to make the connection. <br /> <br />There was a question as to the cost of a new on-site sewer system and new well. <br />Members of the audience volunteered that a new septic system would cost <br />approximately $3,500, and there was a range for a new well from $2,500-$4,000. <br /> <br />There was a question about the inflation factor and its effect on the cost of <br />construction if this project is postponed. We indicated that, in the past several <br />years, construction costs have been relatively stable, probably less than the rate of <br />inflation. However, this is not always true. At times, the rise in construction <br />costs is greater than the rate of inflation. It is dependent upon the economy of the <br />area and number of projects versus number of contractors. <br /> <br />There was a question about the SAC and WAC charges. We indicated that <br />currently City Ordinance requires hook-up within four years, and the SAC and <br />WAC charges are collectable at the time of hook-up. We indicated that the SAC <br />charge has not been raised in approximately nine years, and the WAC charge has <br />not been raised in three years. The City Council and the Utilities Commission do <br />from time-to-time look at these numbers and make adjustments to them. The <br />amount paid is the fee in effect at the time of hook-up. <br /> <br />There was a question about the need for City sewer and water, given the 1-acre <br />lots, and no apparent problems with on-site sewer. We compared the area to <br />Westwood and their ~fi-acre lots. They were having problems with on-site sewer <br />and were unable to rebuild them because of the lack of land. We indicated that 1- <br />acre lots are substantially larger than ~fi-acre, but, in reality, they are substantially <br />smaller than the current 2~/2-acre minimum for on-site sewer and water. <br /> <br />One individual suggested that the City take another survey after the informational <br />hearing, indicating that he felt there would be a more resounding negative response <br />to the question of "are you interested in City sewer and water?" We indicated that <br />would not likely be necessary after we reported the outcome of the information <br />meeting to the City Council. <br /> <br />230/286-1205. feb <br /> <br /> <br />