11-14-1995 Council Packet Special Meeting

Home Browse Search

Webber Hills Homeowners .Nfemomndum Page 3 Homeo%vnen who have recently insuiled a mound sepdc system wll probably not be excited about incurring additional costs for city sewer (approximateiv' homes in Webber Hills now have a mound system). We would have the option to ask the citv' to subsidize tne cost ot the mound systems which are already in piace, or these costs could be shared, to some extent, by the remaining homeowners. Even if city sewer comes to our area, people with new mound systems would not be obligated to hook up to city sewer tor a number of years and therefore could defer the hookup costs. I respectively request that these people consider the best overall interests of the entire neighborhood. liie vast majority of neighbors 1 have talked with this summer and the majority of our committee strongly prefer to petitiort the citv immediately for ciw sewer. The reasons tor advocating municipal sewer at this hrr.e are: 1. Municipal sewer increases our property values. 2. Municipal sewer is a long-term solution. :. .Avoid duplication of costs for mound syste.ms now and. inevitably, city sewer in the future. 4. Municipal sewer costs are assessed over 1 o years instead ot paying up front tor a mound svstem. 5. Mound systems will cause many trees to be destoyed and ruin the visual character of the neizhborhood. 6. Municipal sewers are maintained by the city and we would avoid problems widi our existinz svstems, most of which are older and will require continued maintenance and/or improvement. /..As was discussed at the May 17, 1995 meeting, the mound-tv-pe system is clearly no panacea and has many mechanical components such as float switches, lift pumps and __ hnrlr nn info n home ^hmiM nnv ofan electrical supply which could allow sewage to back up into a home should any ot the primary components fail. .Additionally, mound systems are prone to freeze-up and failure, primarily when not used for a period o'^time. . f 'f* j.'