Laserfiche WebLink
9.0 Evaluation of Development Options 1-3 <br />9.1 Cost Estimates <br />Based on the analysis of the future individual and Joint Utility water system needs in the previous <br />sections of this report, this section provides preliminary estimated costs associated with each <br />development path as well as an evaluation of the options and recommendations for future work. <br />Three options for development of the future water supply systems were considered in this report. <br />Joint Utility Jointly constructed, owned and operated supply, <br />Option 1: storage and treatment system. Independently <br />constructed, owned and operated distribution <br />systems. <br />Joint Utility Jointly constructed, owned and operated supply, <br />Option 2: storage, treatment and distribution system. <br />Independent Make no changes. Operate as independent <br />Utilities utilities. <br />Option 3: <br />A summary of the comparative capital costs and annual maintenance costs are provided in Tables 9.1, <br />9.2 and 9.3 for the three options considered in this report. Capital costs include, groundwater supply <br />wells, water storage facilities, and control systems. Repair and replacement costs of infrastructure are <br />estimated including storage tanks, wells, watermain and SCADA systems. <br />A preliminary estimate of capital improvement and replacement costs were detailed for each option. <br />The same unit costs were applied to the different alternatives. Detailed cost estimates are provided in <br />Appendix B and will be presented in the subsequent sections in greater detail. The decision as to the <br />proportion each city would pay of the total cost to the Joint Utility has not been determined. However, at <br />the start of the Joint Utility the growing communities would pay a negotiated price to access the existing <br />assets now owned by the fully developed communities. A portion of the cost savings realized by the <br />growing communities would be applied to installing needed interconnection piping or upsizing existing <br />interconnections. <br />Once the initial opt -in costs for the growing communities are determined, capital costs for additional <br />infrastructure or maintenance costs should be recovered from development fees or distributed across <br />the joint utility members. The exact costs paid for existing and new infrastructure would be negotiated <br />but would result in the growing communities purchasing access to the existing infrastructure at a <br />discount over the price of a new installation thereby providing incentive to them to participate. <br />Since Lino Lakes Well 6 was not yet constructed at the beginning of this study, a future well is stili <br />included in the future costs to Lino Lakes and the joint utility, and this is not shown as existing <br />infrastructure. <br />A key assumption is that developers would pay for all distribution related capital costs (new watermain <br />and interconnections), so no distribution costs are included in the capital cost estimates (Tables 9.1 and <br />9.2). A more detailed look at this item may result in some reconstruction of existing interconnections to <br />up size them to meet conveyance needs. The costs of these types of upgrades would need to be borne <br />Joint Water utility Feasibility Study 28 <br />