12/21/1983 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

L AGREEMENT REGARDING STATE ROAD 60 WATER LINE Commissioner Bowman asked how the.Utilities Department arrived at the percentages on the cost of the water line as shown in Item #1 of the proposed Water Service Agreement between the County and West County --Utility, Inc. Utilities Director Terry Pinto explained how these figures were computed, but didn't feel it was necessary that they be included in the agreement because Item #2 sets up the number of taps and the amount of doll,a;rs. Commissioner Scurlock explained that 'staff looked at the service in the area and the availability, and decided to oversize the system to a 20 -inch line. The County's portipn will be paid by the County and Farmers Home Administration money, and the rest will be paid totally by the developer. Everybody will pay their fair share. The utility, i.e., the. County, is paying for the oversizing, which will be collected in future impact fees, tap -in charges, etc. Director Pinto suggested that the description of the water line route that appears in the third "whereas" clause should not be so definitive because the County is going to be retaining an engineering consultant to review the proposed route. He suggested that language be included to reflect that that this is a proposed route and may be changed from "12th Street to Kings Highway" to "8th Street to Kings Highway." Commissioner Wodtke asked if the water line would serve those property owners east of Kings Highway and SR #60 and Administrator Wright stated that they were not including that area at this time. Vice Chairman Scurlock explained that because Farmers Home Administration money is involved, the County is trying to select a route which will satisfy some of their requirements in re to low income and necessity in certain areas. DEC 2 1 1983 _ 28 BEAK Ti - J