Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Marian Meadows Rezone and Subdivision Final Environmental Impact Statement 1-24 <br />One of the ways in which the water district would be potentially affected is the use of individual wells by <br />future development. One of the disadvantages of individual well water supplies is that water supply and <br />hydrants for fire flow are not provided. In addition, the systems are not monitored for water quality and <br />reliability of service. In this case, an adverse unintended consequence of state water rights, as applied to <br />the Easton Water District, with the demands of the Marian Meadows development may be the <br />development of water supplies for new developments in the area that serves the public less effectively <br />than the expansion of the water district system. <br />Cumulative Impacts <br />All cumulative scenarios for either rural development or development equivalent to the proposed PUD are <br />in excess of the water district’s existing water rights and additional applications pending. This demand <br />would substantially increase the likelihood of using water sources other than the water district such as <br />individual wells. This scenario would impose difficulties in managing surface and water rights to <br />recognize senior rights and provide in-stream flows. If service is provided by individual wells, fire flow <br />would not be required. <br />The extent of reduction that can be achieved through water conservation programs varies considerably <br />between communities. Generally, there is a strong correlation between utility provisions of resources, <br />including education and incentives, and the effectiveness of a program (AWE 2009). <br />Utilities – Sewage Disposal <br />The applicant’s proposed wastewater treatment facilities with a combination of mechanical and biological <br />processes employ technology that has been successfully used to serve large concentrations of population <br />for many years. In this application, with a relatively small population, there are a number of factors that <br />may lead to adverse impacts, including: <br /> High cost of implementation. The initial capital cost of a wastewater treatment facility is very high. <br />For a service area of 443 units, the cost per unit is several magnitudes larger than on-site disposal. <br />The sequencing batch reactor (SBR) wastewater treatment system proposed, however, is one of the <br />lowest-cost alternatives available if such a system is needed or desirable. <br /> High cost of operation and maintenance. Any sewage treatment facility requires a relatively high <br />level of oversight of operation and maintenance of key facilities. In this case, with the potential for <br />variable populations due to vacation homes, a very high level of oversight may be required during <br />seasonal startups and weekends. This task may involve checking the operation on a regular basis <br />several times a day. It is also critical that personnel be on-call if critical parts of the system are not <br />operating properly. The SBR system proposed needs relatively high levels of oversight and <br />maintenance. For a service area of 443 units, the cost per unit is likely to be many times higher than <br />typical charges for municipal sewage treatment due to economies of scale. <br /> High cost of replacement. The proposal to use steel tanks in the SBR system reduces initial capital <br />cost, but ensures that major portions of the system would require replacement in 15 to 25 years.