HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-05-15 SDC MINSDC Minutes
May 15, 1996 4 p.m. Council Chambers
Committee members present included Don Greene, Don Laws, Larry Medinger, Darrell Boldt, Ken
Hagen, and Kevin Talbert. Staff present included Jill Turner, Jim Olson and Lynna Batters.
Consultant Wes Reynolds was also present.
The meeting was called to order at 4:10 p.m.
STORM DRAINS
Merlinget questioned why the storm sewer SDC is up by 815¢... Boldt said that although there is an
increase in projects, impervious area is down. Turner said the difference is the $5 million
engineering and overhead that was added in (page 11/12). Also, on page 16 of the updated draft
notes, originally only the cost of pipe was given, the engineering design wasn't included.
Medinger said he asks because his developments include improvements to the creeks. The current
charge is $252 and the proposed updated charge is $456, that's almost $500 that he has to justify to
his clients--that's a big difference! We do need a credit process. Some of the improvements
Medinger makes to creek beds is due to upstream contributors. This fee is more expensive than the
whole project along his property. Merlinget has also talked about looking at zoning as a remedy to
this inbalance... Turner suggested the committee make a recommendation today. Updating the
storm drain plan will probably be a three or four year project. Storm sewer SDCs are on the future
considerations list for when the plan is updated... Hagen said that although the storm drain SDC
seems like a lot, transportation is likely undervalued, so the total charge will actually be closer to
true costs... Medinger stated that he doesn't think zoning would be that difficult to figure out and
implement... Laws said "we all agree, but we need to wait until the studies are done."
Laws moved to approve the storm drain methodology with the conditions that: 1) figures be
rechecked, and 2) note to Council that we suggest a zoning feasibility study. Medinger
seconded the motion. Ayes all.
Laws moved that the City establish a more formal process for credits for all SDCs, making
sure it is accessible, Talbert seconded the motion. Ayes all.
This was reviewed and it was found that the engineering and administration costs were included
twice. The latest version corrects this.
WASTEWATER
Turner said that the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) upgrade will provide .45 MGD additional
capacity; the associated population increase is 4,015 people. She also took the $27 million dollars
cost for the upgrade and divided that by 22,000, which is more than the figured costs. Only looking
at the growth portion of phase III, this is a true improvement fee... Medinger asked if this is based
on a particular plan... Hagen said it is based on the soon to be approved plan. Wetlands are a part
of that plan but not the "improvement" part... Turner said the largest part of the cost attributed to
growth is for the additional digester.
SDC Minutes -- May 14, 1996 Page 20
Turner said that last time the WWTP was improved, 80 % of it was federally funded, therefore the
City didn't include this portion in the reimbursement fee. If the City didn't grow, the new digester
wouldn't be needed.
Looking at the sewer collection SDC the committee questioned the population figure. The design
population has been changed to be the same as for the sewage treatment plant capacity.
Medinger asked if the trunk line projects were new or old?.. Turner said the allocation percentages
are the same as before, and that the project list is almost the same, if not the same... Medinger
asked if they are all improvements figured to be growth driven... Turner said that information is on
the list. Six of the projects are allocated to growth at an estimated cost of $352,000, the rest of the
projects, valued at $600,000 are not growth driven so they will not be financed by SDCs. The
upgrade of the Bear Creek trunk from the WWTP to Walker is attributed to growth... Medinger said
that ten years ago the line by Mill Pond subdivision needed upsizing... Olson said this is the third
phase to the sanitary sewer plan. If there were no growth the City wouldn't need to do those
improvements.
Hagen moved to approve the sewer treatment and collection SDC methodologies as updated;
Talbert seconded the motion. Ayes all.
Turner said the estimated cost of the WWTP upgrade is in future dollars plus a 25 % contingency.
The engineering bid will go out in a month or so. After the upgrade has been designed the
contingency will decrease to about 15%... Medinger asked if the cost came in lower would the
SDCs be corrected down?.. Turner said that major changes will come back for updates.
Laws asked if as projects change or are completed can the numbers just be plugged into the
formulas?.. Turner said that SDCs are updated annually. The rate model is approved by city
council annually. If there is a transportation plan in two years it will come back to this process...
Boldt said they don't want any surprises.
WATER SUPPLY
Medinger offered a sample question about credits for water supply. In one of his projects
(Mountain Meadows) he negotiated with TID to keep the water rights rather than giving them up.
He did get rights to do the landscape watering. Is that eligible for a credit?.. Turner noted that the
subdivision benefits through lower irrigation costs. The issue for determining credit will be if the
rights can be transferred to the City. The City is scheduled to spend time and money to study water
rights.
The discussion went on to water supply (page 8). Medinger questioned where the figure of
$500,000 for water rights from TID came from. Is it just a number from Council or is it a defined
project? How was it established and what are we getting for it?.. Tumer said it is a staff estimate...
Boldt said he has a problem with that... Medinger added that water supply SDCs of $2,296 are hard
to justify to a client... Turner said the CIP is almost done and this project is included... Medinger
asked, what if the costs change?
Laws said this is a two step process. Should the improvement fee be based on the CIP? Whether
we agree with the projects is another subject... Boldt said he is looking at both at the same time
SDC Minutes -- May 15, 1996 Page 21
because he is dealing with both issues now... Laws corrected that, no, we're not... Hagen again
voiced his concern at not assigning a fee just because there isn't a project.
Boldt suggested taking out upsizing the Medford/Talent line until Council okays it, which leaves
$708,440... Greene asked if the City would be increasing or protecting it's supply... Olson said the
City is negotiating with TID now, and actually has been for the past four years. The City has been
using irrigation water for drinking water via pumping it up to the treatment plant. To gain water
rights from TID they will want us to buy them and their debt out. It will be very_ expensive. Initial
high maintenance costs must be taken into account also ($60,000-$70,000 per year to start). The
$500,000 estimate is conservative.
Laws said that what is really needed is a list which can be updated automatically... Boldt asked
where the 36% "attributable to growth" figure came from... It came from Steve Hall--This cost is a
proportional cost. It was calucated by using the future capacity above the current minimum city
standard capacity or actual current size, whichever is larger. Medinger prefers incremental cost,
which is a change from the prior methodology... Greene said the committee would approve based on
incremental cost (Reeder Reservoir line).
Hagen moved the discussion on to water distribution (page 3), an improvement fee... Boldt asked
about the shared cost figure... Turner said that applies when both residential and commercial
portions benefit by an improvement. Therefore, residential only doesn't include commercial...
The water treatment reimbursement fee, using full capacity and full population, is the same as used
capacity and current population. The Strawberry pump station and reservoir is now a
reimbursement fee. That's just a switch in what we're calling it. The water distribution numbers
are adjusted down by an irrigation factor because our old data on water sales included some TID
information. Staff stands corrected- This number is the percentage of single family residents to total
residential population. The factor reduces the SDC.
Talbert moved to approve the water SDCs subject to two changes in supply. The changes
requested are that the Reeder Reservoir - WTP pipeleine be recalulated using incremental costs
and eliminate the Medford/Talent pipeline from the project list as presented in the most recent
version; Greene seconded the motion. Ayes all.
Boldt asked if figures are based on actual costs... Turner said they are off project lists using the
previous methodology... Greene said that it should be based on incremental cost. Boldt moved that
the water distribution fee be based on incremental, not capacity costs.
The committee said they would like to have the information updated to the original format of the
draft report, including a list of recommendations for Council. They want to meet and approve the
information as a group before it goes on to Council.
The next meeting was set for June 4 at 4 p.m., or the next available Tuesday, allowing the
committee to have the information for a week before approving it. New tables, addendum, credits
and policy decisions.
Meeting adjourned at 5:35.
(g:\j illXwp\sdc\minuu~s\sdcmin.all)
SDC Minutes -- May 15, 1996 Page 22