Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.11 TWA Informational Report CITY OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:, February 8, 1988 SUBJECT : Tri-Valley Wastewater Authority (TWA) Informational Report EXHIBITS ATTACHED None RECOMMENDATION Receive Report FINANCIAL STATEMENT: The Tri-Valley Wastewater Authority is a separate political entity and its activities will not financially affect the City of Dublin. DESCRIPTION At the regular City Council meeting on 'January 25, 1988, the City Council heard a request from 2 residents regarding proposed sewer expansions being considered by the Tri-Valley Wastewater Authority (TWA) . The Council requested additional : information on the issue. Staff has met with Mr. Bob Whitley, General Manager of TWA and discussed their current plans and proposed actions on the provision of additional sewer capacity within the Tri-Valley area. The TWA has representatives of the Dublin San Ramon Services District, the Cities of Livermore and Pleasanton, and the County of Alameda. The providers of sewer services in this area recognize that without additional capacity, it will not be possible to provide additional sewer services in the future. DSRSD currently has capacity remaining to serve 4, 800 dwelling unit equivalent (DUE) . The provision of these additional services require long term planning and design of future facilities. Similar to PG&E or the telephone company, the TWA Board attempts to define how utility services will be provided if the governing bodies which have jurisdiction related to land use, authorize additional development. TWA has spent a substantial amount of time preparing alternative studies and proceeding through the Environmental Impact Review process. The EIR Report was adopted by the Authority in September, 1987. Mr. Whitley explained that once the Authority has developed a proposed project, each of the member entities will need to respond to 2 issues . The first, is whether the entity wants to participate in the proposed project. The second issue which the entity would need to respond to would be the amount of capacity they desired in the project. Mr. Whitley indicated that the TWA Board has adopted a policy that the pipeline size should serve a capacity of 19 MGD during dry weather flow. He also indicated that the pumping stations, treatment plants and reservoirs are being designed to reflect anticipated growth which was stated in the general plans as of late 1986. It is anticipated that the Authority will take action at their meeting on February 17, 1988 to request input from the member entities on the issues discussed above. The Dublin San Ramon. Services District is the entity responsible for planning and providing water and sewer services in the City of , Dublin. Therefore, the elected Board of Directors of that agency are- responsible for determining how that decision will be made. The residents who attended the meeting requested that the Council urge the DSRSD Board to submit the issue to the voters. The decision of a method of approving agency participation will be left to each of the entities (DSRSD, Alameda County, City of Pleasanton and City of Livermore) . Mr. Paul Ryan indicated that the DSRSD Board has not received any written petition as of February 4, 1988. Mr. Whitley of the TWA Staff indicated that the precise cost estimate is not clearly identified at this time since the project scope and number of participants is currently unknown. He explained to Staff that one alternative may have a total cost of approximately $120 million and it involves the transportation of partially treated waste to the East Bay COPIES TO: Bob Whitley, General Manager, TWA. ITEM NO. Page 2 Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) Treatment Plant in Oakland. That facility currently has excess capacity and the agency has made an aggressive presentation which has attractive financial terms. As with all of the alternates originally considered, the. TWA has evaluated the potential cost impacts of each alternate. At the previous City Council meeting, it was suggested that the project may cost Dublin residents $35 million. Mr. Whitley explained that the past , practice of the sewer providers in the Valley was to recover capital costs . from new development rather than the current user base. He indicated that once a project had been identified and received commitments from participating agencies, they would be in a better position to define the methodology for paying costs in the event that the new development fees lagged behind the actual debt payments. Mr. Whitley was unaware of any published cost breakdown showing the share for Dublin residents. He did indicate that by agreement, DSRSD had indicated that they had an interest in approximately 25% of any future expansion. However, it is important to recognize that DSRSD services areas outside of the City of Dublin; particularly, Mr. Whitley noted that additional capacity was considered for servicing the Dougherty Valley projects currently being planned in the City of San Ramon and Contra Costa County. The purpose of this report was to provide additional background information and it is presented as an informational report.