Coburg Connection (4) - Laserfiche WebLink

New Search

• The connection costs will be based on allocation of dedicated capacity and required environmental performance to serve existing and projected future wastewater customers. of Coburg through it's twenty-year planning period, and the Coburg wastewater facilities plan and comprehensive plan shall - be used to represent the wastewater profile (i.e. number of customers per user class, flow and load characteristics, etc.) • For the purposes of this analysis, there is no available existing or planned capacity in the MWMC system for users outside the UGB, because the existing capacities and planned capacity expansions derived from the MWMC twenty-yeaz Facilities Plan is based on and allocated to the 2025 population and employmentprojections within the Eugene-Springfield UGB. • Because the existing and planned capacities of regional wastewater facilities (at build out of the MWMC Facilities Plan) aze fully allocated to populations in the Eugene-Springfield UGB, the costs for connecting Coburg wiIl be based on the unit cost to provide the additional capacities required to serve Coburg, which would have to be added within the twenty-yeaz planning horizon (some sooner, and some later), and the costs associated with twenty-year fmancing for the new capacity increments that need to be included. • All costs and values aze being considered at mid-yeaz 2008, which is the current time-value of the costs estimated by city staff. • Any reference to or use of user rates, cost centers, and costs of service will be to the existing MWMC user rate structure and model in its entirefy. • The cost analysis must recognize that the MWMC Facilities Plan projects will fall short of the meeting the temperature/thermal load requirements of the draft TMDL. A proxy of capital infrastructure and associated costs to meet the projected MWMC waste load allocation, and Coburg's prorated share of those costs should be identified. Deliverables 1. Report on the connection cost calculations with supporting documentation. This information to include: 1) a baseline cost calculation which meets all of the given project assumptions and baseline pazameters; 2) any identified costs that may not clearly fall within the direct cost-equity/no subsidy (baseline) parameters and which the officials may consider as policy choices. If such additional costs aze identified, the associated policies should be clearly described and the implications of policy decisions on the connection costs detailed. 2. A summary report of methodologies used for the baseline and policy option calculations. 3. Brief descriptions and reports on u to three co p mpazable situations (case examples) in the State of C7egon (if they aze readily identifiable and if they are comparable to the policy framework that has been established for the Coburg cost estimate) in which municipal wastewater services were extended from a defined s ervice az ea to a n ew user outside o f that service azea, preferably mvolvmg a regional wastewater system of similaz size and structure to the MVGq.VIC. This report to summarize the example (including the demographics, governance structures, and relevant conditions of the entities involved) and clearly outline the policy decisions made and costing methodologies employed in calculating the costs for connecting or extending wastewater services. i 4. Presentation of the results of the analysis to five governing bodies (Eugene, Springfield, Coburg, Lane County, and MWMC).