SLIDE 1
Public Information Session May 2012
SLIDE 2 Created and charged at May 3, 2010 Town
Meeting
Purpose Four guidelines driving the study
- Sustainability of a clean water supply
- Economics
- Environmental
- Consistency with community character
Study Area
- Village Common District
- Village Overlay District
SLIDE 3
- Provide sewering to enable growth In the VCD/VOD
- Create affordable limited sewering that does not
require funding via the wider community (user based)
- Limited sewering prevents sprawling growth and
maintains Littleton’s character
SLIDE 4
Treatment plant design (phasing) Distribution Design Economics of sewer district Life cycle costs Power generation
SLIDE 5
Ted Doucette, Chair - Board of Selectmen Megan Ford, Vice-chair – Citizen at Large Peter Cassinari – Board of Health Joe Collentro - Permanent Municipal Building
Committee
Richard Crowley – Planning Board Savas Danos – LELWD Stephen Jahnle – Citizen at large Donald MacIver – Citizen at large Ken Smith – Citizen at large Warren Terrell – Citizen at large
SLIDE 6 Charles River Watershed Association (CRWA) Natural Systems Utilities (NSU)
- Grant obtained by CRWA (from Barr)
$100,000
$25,000
SLIDE 7 Approved at town meeting
$50,000
Expenses to date
- Natural Systems Utilities
$28,500
$500
$10,000
- Balance/other expenses (SP details, permits)
$11,000
SLIDE 8 Definition: Systems that are traditionally used to collect municipal wastewater in gravity and/or pressure sewers and convey it to a central primary treatment plant, before discharge on receiving surface waters. Large capital expenses are bonds paid by the general fund - all taxpayers contribute whether or not they are served by the system. Typical process with conventional sewer:
Target sewer district/area Calculate maximum flows and capacity Preliminary Design Design system for full build out and capacity Apply to State for Permit Town Meeting approve funding Bid documents and bid award System construction System operational and property connections
SLIDE 9 Chelmsford
- $165 million
- 3.1 million GPD discharged out of district
South Acton
- Cost being borne by tax base
- Full capacity built - actual flow underutilized
Tewksbury
- Cost shifted to all tax payers
- Discharged out of district
SLIDE 10 Smart Sewer Overview
- Wastewater is a resource
- Smart Growth
Enhances economic growth Reduces overall energy Increases short term affordability Optimizes benefits to environment
SLIDE 11
Economic Component of Smart Sewers
Sewer districts
Installed in response to growth/demand Focuses development
Reduces risk of conventional sewer
Reduced upfront capital
Installed in response to demand
Paid by users
Betterment User fees
SLIDE 12
Reducing carrying costs by using technologies that are affordable at small scale and then installing capacity in phases to match growth – “just-in-time, “fit-for-purpose”
Large carrying costs – higher risk or tax increase to subsidize user rate Small carrying costs – reduced risk to tax base and user
SLIDE 13 Economic and Environmental benefits
(Potential future phases)
- Subsidizing service from:
Water reuse Energy generation
Anaerobic digestion of organic matter
Reduces methane gas in environment
Septage Food waste
SLIDE 14 Environmental Benefits
- Water goes back to the source
Preserves natural flows
- Improves water quality (eliminates septic)
Reduces nitrate burden
SLIDE 15
carbon water cost nutrients carbon water nutrients
SLIDE 16
carbon water cost nutrients carbon water nutrients carbon water Potential income nutrients
SLIDE 17 Property improvements Variety of businesses
Increase in tax base
- Improved buildings leads to property tax increase
Revenue generated by sewer district Development is confined to service area Minimal risk to tax payers outside of district
- Construction paid by betterments
- Operation and maintenance paid by user fees
- Funds paid out by town roll into district expenses
SLIDE 18 Costs
- Setup of (sewered) development overlay district
- Wastewater design and construction
Benefits
- Energy generation from wastewater
- Sprawl contained - less utility costs
- Open space protection - resource value
- Tax revenues from overlay district and
development rights
Source CRWA
SLIDE 19 Process
- Mapping
- Sewer Survey
- Preliminary design calculations
- Smart Sewering Analysis
- Meeting with property owners
- Financial
SLIDE 20
Map appin ing
SLIDE 21 Town provided priorities for a sewer system
in Littleton – Community Values Assessment
- Financial – paid by users not taxes
- Aquifer Protection
- Reduce solid waste by-product
- Quality of life – scenic vistas
Survey of Property Owners in VCD and VOD - 95% of respondents interested
SLIDE 22
SLIDE 23 Respons
Parcels ls % parcels Acres % acreag age Yes, interested 69 78.4% 108.1 67.2% Need more info 17 19.3% 47.4 29.5% Not interested 2 2.3% 5.4 3.3% Sub-total 88 100.0% 160.8 100.0% No response 37 28.0 Total 125 188.8
SLIDE 24
Calculated flow for build out of study area Estimated the length, cost of collection
systems
SLIDE 25
Reuse water – flush water, irrigation Biogas – sell or use to power treatment plant Anaerobic Digestion – septage, tipping fee Food Waste – tipping fee, anaerobic digestion Partnership with land owners subsidize costs Transfer of Development Rights
SLIDE 26 Growth Projects
- Local build out, national trends, New
England/Massachusetts recovery, I495 Metrowest
Financial Model
- Parameters – phasing, cost of land, private vs.
public financing, connection fees, subsidies
Ownership Options
- Municipal, Quasi-Government, Private non-profit,
Public Private Partnership
Conclusions
SLIDE 27 The LCSFC feels that the results of the report
indicate a sewer common district is financially viable in the Littleton Common.
Requesting $35,000, offset by additional
Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) by LELWD, budget neutral, to go through the next steps
- Further Hydro/Geo Study
- Request for Qualifications
- Owners Representative
SLIDE 28
Questions and Answers
