HomeMy WebLinkAboutC.054.93010_0819Commissioner Ray asked if there were any regulatory dollar amounts in regard to
tap -on fees, or if this was just at the discretion of the water companies.
Smith said each water company had its own fee schedule.
Commissioner Ray asked what agency approved the fee schedule, or changes in
the water rates.
Smith said that in the case of the Iredell Water Corporation, rate changes would
first go before the board of directors and then to the North Carolina Public Utilities
Commission.
Bowles said the water companies had different rules about water line extensions.
Carl Chambers, of Chambers & Sons Water Well Drilling, spoke in opposition to
the amendments. Mr. Chambers said his well drilling business had been in operation for
the past 46 years, and the amendments were being discussed at a bad time due to the
drought and local water conditions. Chambers said it appeared the amendments were
primarily for the water companies. Mr. Chambers voiced concerns about acts of
terrorism on public water lines.
Buddy Hemric said the homes in his area were on a community well and that
several years ago the residents circulated a petition to connect onto a public water line.
He said the water company refused service due to not having enough people interested.
Mr. Hemric said the water company had to know how many people would utilize the
service before the lines were extended due to the costs. He said it would appear the water
companies would need a specific number of households from the developers.
Smith said the developer would probably guarantee a specific number of tap -ons.
Attorney Pope said the customary procedure of the water companies was to
recover the cost of extending the water lines from the ones benefiting from the extension.
He said that if it cost $10,000 to extend the line, the company knew how many new
customers it would need to justify the cost. Pope said the water companies tried to
protect the existing customers by not having a rate increase when line extensions
occurred. Mr. Pope said that if a developer extended the water lines, the water
company's customers would not be affected because the developer paid the costs.
Chairman Tice asked for a clarification on allowing homeowners to have wells
when public water was available to them.
Smith said that if a developer connected to a public water line, the amendments did
not require a connection from the homeowner. He said the amendments required the
developer to extend the waterline to the property line of each lot. Smith said it would be
up to the individual to attach onto the water line or have a well dug. He said the options
might be diminished if the lots were less than 20,000 sq. ft. in size.
No one else desired to speak, and Chairman Tice adjourned the public hearing.
OTIO by Commissioner Bowles to postpone action on the proposed subdivision
and zoning ordinance until the August 20, 2002 meeting.
VOTING: Ayes - 5; Nays - 0.
(Note: Commissioner Bowles said that between now and August 20, he would like the
staff to find out more information about (1) the various policies used by the water companies
pertaining to line extensions and (2) what benefits, if any, the county would gain by the water
companies building one large well vs. several smaller ones by the individual homeowners. He
noted that municipalities obtained their water from lakes.)