Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> G. S. 70 <br /> ~q-f <br /> SIMON W, FREESE. P.E. Co ~ <br /> JAMES R. NICHOLS. P.E. \.IN <br /> ROBERT L. NICHOLS. P.E ~ee.~ j} <br /> LEE B. FREESE, P.E. <br /> ROBERT S. GOOCH. P.E. <br /> FREESE \, II \ICHOLS, I N C . JOE PAUL JONES, P.E. <br /> ROBERT A. THOMPSON III, P.E. <br /> JOHN H. COOK, P,E. <br /> CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND ~ T. ANTHONY REID. P.E, <br /> JOE B. MAPES, P.E. <br /> OCIE C. ALLEN, P.E, <br /> W. ERNEST CLEMENT, P.E. <br /> ELVIN C. COPELAND. P.E. <br /> GARY N. REEVES, P.E <br /> January 25, 1984 GEORGE HUMAN, P.E, <br /> VICE PRESIDENT. AUSTIN <br /> ~'lr. A. C. Gonzalez, Jr. APR 4 1984 <br /> Ci ty Manager <br /> City of San Marcos <br /> 630 E. Hopkins <br /> San Marcos, Texas 78666 <br /> RE: Determination of Cost <br /> Breakdown for Water <br /> Distribution System <br /> Capital Recovery Fee <br /> SAM 84507 <br /> Dear A.C.: <br /> In accordance with our letter agreement signed January 3, 1984, it is our <br /> pleasure to transmit this letter report covering the results of the <br /> breakdown on the capital recovery fee system being proposed. Reference is <br /> made to the IISan Marcos Water System Studyll performed by Freese and <br /> Nichols, Inc. in February, 1983. <br /> The costs for construction of the improvements recommended by 1987 in the <br /> report were broken down into those costs associated with existing <br /> developments, those associated with new growth through 1987, and those <br /> costs associated with new growth expected beyond 1987. A summary of these <br /> costs is shown on Table 1. The methodology used in developing these costs <br /> is delineated in the following paragraphs. <br /> The recommended improvements can be divided into three categories, as <br /> follows: (1) Water distribution infrastructure improvements; (2) <br /> Waterline extensions; and (3) improvements and additions to the <br /> distribution facilities. For a summary of the classification of the <br /> recommended pipelines, please refer to the map accompanying this letter. <br /> The lines highlighted in green or yellow are necessary infrastructure <br /> improvements to serve existing and future development up through the <br /> population estimated for the year 2000. Those lines which are primarjly <br /> benefici al to existing developments are shaded yellow. The cost of these <br /> lines has been allocated to existing users only. Those lines which <br /> benefit existing developments and are also designed to serve new growth <br /> are shaded green. The cost of these lines has been divided equally <br /> between existing users and new developments. Since these infrastructure <br /> improvements will benefit all users, including those represented by growth <br /> beyond 1987, the pipeline costs for future development have been allocated <br /> on the basis of projected populations. The projected populations for 1987 <br /> and 2000 are 28,000 and 46,000, respectively. The estimated 1983 <br /> population is 25,000. The resulting increases in population are 3,000 for <br /> the period 1983-1987, and 18,000 for the period 1988-2000. Consequently, <br /> the pipeline costs for new developments were divided in the ratio of 3,000 <br /> 512/451,7955 ONE HIGHLAND CEtHER SUITE 560 314 HIGHLAND MALL BLVD AUSTIN. TEXAS 78752 <br />