Agenda - Council - 04/23/1996 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

~Water and Sewer. Trunk Fee~. Water and sewer trunk fees are charges collected to defray the costs of watermain trunk lines and sanitary sewer interceptors, which have been sized to service the ultimate utility service area. The City has established a non-residential land use charge of $2,625 per acre for the sewer trunk and $5,843 per acre for the water trunk. The total area of the school property is 52.95 acres. Approximately 9.3 acres are identified on the county half-section map as wetlands. The City would propose discounting a parcel comprising the southwesterly comer of the property from the trunk area charge. This is a natural triangular area having dimension of 1200 feet along the westerly boundary and 900 feet along the southerly boundary. Thus, the area applied to the trunk charge would be 40.55 acres. Water Trunk Charge 40.55 acres x $5,843 per acre = $236,934 Sewer Trunk Charge 40.55 acres x $2,625 per acre = $106.444 Total Trunk Charges = $343,378 * · represents a $26,251 fee reduction Lateral Benefit Charge I I I i I I I This charge is the cost of extending water and sewer line through the property receiving service. In the case of the school, the school constructed its own sewer services line to the City's~ interceptor sewer and no hteral benefit charges are being requested. In the case of watermain 1,515 feet of watermain was required along C.S.A.H. #5 to provide service to the school property. City policy defines waterlines up to eight inch as being considered lateral-size mainsffi The cost of these laterals is detailed on Attachment A. Watermain Lateral Benefit: $42,608 Although we realize the total billing of $560,361 is a sizeable expense on the school's part, the cost of the extensions will be nearly $950,000 in construction and indirect project costs. The Ci.t~ therefore, is financing the $389,639 difference. Although we have had some residenti,il~ development made possible by the trunk sewer and water extensions, the trunk revenues anticipated in the foreseeable furore is not projected to exceed these expenses plus financing costll We cannot consider a further reduction of trunk charges as you suggested at our meeting in Ju~ in that that would represent an inappropriate burden upon our customer base to the benefit of On-,g customer. At this time, we request payment of the above charges. Sincerely, CITY OF RAMSEY Steve Jankowski City Engineer Jessie Hart, Finance Officer Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator I !