|
by the benefiting community to a large extent but not entirely since an interconnection is valuable to all
<br />parties.
<br />9.1.1 Capital Costs
<br />As shown in Table 9.1 and Table 9.2 below, total capital costs are decreased by $12 million through the
<br />formation of a joint utility (Options 1 and 2) as compared to individual development (Option 3). The
<br />formation of a joint utility would reduce the need for 7 wells and 3 million gallons of storage. In addition
<br />to this the maintenance of the reduced infrastructure will be spread out over a larger population base.
<br />The total number of wells per person in a joint utility will be less than for individual cities. The total
<br />gallons of storage per person will also be less in a joint utility than for the individual cities. If the total
<br />benefit of the excess supply can be realized through the installation of back up generation at key wells,
<br />storage can be further reduced. If declining per capita use trends continue it is possible that zero new
<br />wells are needed at all through the remainder of the planning period.
<br />Table 9.1 Summary of capital costs for Options i and 2 — Joint Utility development
<br />Centerville
<br />Circle Pines
<br />Columbus
<br />Hugo
<br />Lexington
<br />Lino Lakes
<br />Joint Utility
<br />Cost
<br />Total
<br />Storage
<br />Supply
<br />Contingency
<br />Legal anal
<br />Combined
<br />Combined
<br />Engineering
<br />Infrastructuire Costs
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$p
<br />$0
<br />$u
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$6,900,000
<br />$4 200,000
<br />$3,300.000
<br />$2,900000
<br />$17,400;000
<br />$6,900,000
<br />$4,200,000
<br />$3,300,000
<br />$2,900,000
<br />$17,400,000
<br />Table 9.2 Summary of capital costs for Option 3 - individual city development
<br />Joint Water Utility Feasibility Study 29
<br />Storage
<br />Supply
<br />Contingency
<br />Legat and
<br />Combined
<br />Engineering
<br />Infrastru."ure Costs
<br />Centerville
<br />$1,500,000
<br />$800,000
<br />$700,000
<br />$600,000
<br />$3,600,000
<br />Circle Pines
<br />$1.500,000
<br />$200000
<br />$500,000
<br />$400,400
<br />$2.700,000
<br />Columbus
<br />$2.150,000
<br />$200,000
<br />$700,000
<br />$600.004
<br />$3,700;000
<br />Hugo
<br />$4.600,000
<br />$3,300,000
<br />$2,400000
<br />$2,100000
<br />$12.300,200
<br />Lexington
<br />$0
<br />$200000
<br />$60,000
<br />$50,000
<br />$300,000
<br />Lino Lakes
<br />$2,080.000
<br />$2,100.000
<br />$1,200,100
<br />$1.100,000
<br />$6,500,000
<br />Joint Utility Cost
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />Total
<br />$11,800,000
<br />$6,800,000
<br />$5,600,000
<br />$4,900.000
<br />$29,000,000
<br />Joint Water Utility Feasibility Study 29
<br />
|