A total of 218 questions/comments were received at the June 29, 2006 meeting, and responses to all will be posted. An additional 59 questions/comments were submitted at the July 12, 2006 meeting.

1. Where are you proposing the on-lot disposal units to be located?  Additional disposal sites? Where?
   Most of the land disposal sites are located within the new developments being constructed along the Route 100 corridor.  The exception is for Upland Farms where several drip disposal fields are proposed.  The Township’s capacity (60,000gpd) is contained in the constructed and planned sites within the new developments as well as Upland Farms.  The Township is currently investigating four (4) additional locations.  One on the Popjoy property in Wallace Township, one on state lands managed by the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources and two that due to negotiations with land owners must go unnamed.  All four (4) showed merit for use as a land disposal site during a preliminary review of soil data.  A subsurface investigation has been done on only one thus far…the state lands, which proved unsuitable for land disposal use.
2. Can you use your own contractor to make the connection or does the Township provide contractor?
   You can use your own contractor to make the connection.  They, however, must adhere to the construction standards and specifications of the Upper Uwchlan Township Municipal Authority (UUTMA).  Also, the construction must be inspected by an UUTMA representative.
3. Is Matt Brown a volunteer or is he a paid employee?  If he is paid, to whom does he report?
   Matt Brown is a paid employee of ARRO Consulting, Inc. (ARRO).  ARRO is a consulting engineering firm that has been hired by the Township and UUTMA to provide assistance on sanitary sewerage planning, design and construction.  ARRO reports to both the UUTMA as well as the Board of Supervisors.  Matt Brown was selected as the representative of ARRO to provide services to the Township and UUTMA due to his extensive experience with sanitary sewer systems.
4. How much did developers contribute to wastewater facility?  How long is ARRO under contract with UUT?  How did the misinformation get out?
   As noted in the slide presentation, the developer’s contribution to the sanitary sewer system thus far has been $19.6 million.  As the Waste Water Treatment Facility (WWTF) moves to Phase II, this number will grow.
   ARRO’s service to the Township is renewed annually by the Board of Supervisor’s and UUTMA.  For 2006, this expires prior to the annual reorganization meeting in January, 2007.
   The Township can only speculate on how the misinformation was distributed.  No facts to answer this question are available.
5. If the homeowner “up front” costs exceed $10,000, will it then be brought up for popular vote for approval?
   The up front costs of around $10,000 includes a tapping fee, which has been fixed by resolution of the UUTMA, and an estimate of the lateral connection costs.  Because each property is different, the connection cost could vary somewhat.  However, the $!0,000 figure is a conservative estimate.  If an individual property should exceed $10,000, it will not be brought up for popular vote.
6. What was the cost per house for the sewer in the Stonehedge development?
   The final cost to each Stonehedge homeowner was approximately $19,400. This included a pro rata share of all infrastructure costs in the street as well as the lateral connection.
7. I have been using a septic tank for nearly 20 years with no problem. Why would I be required (or interested) in public sewer?
   Have you quantified the risk?  What is it?
   Septic tanks that are well constructed and maintained in suitable soils will last many years with few if any problems.  However, they do fail.  Public sewer provides a clear means to avoid the cost, the health hazard and environmental impact of the failure.  While yours may not have failed, others have and will.  The Township’s position toward requiring public sewer where available is to take a responsible approach toward the avoiding those problems.
   The risk lies in the cost of replacement of the septic system which in UUT runs between $15,000 and $25,000.  There is also the environmental impact on a protected watershed and most importantly, the health hazard of exposure of pets and children to bacterial contamination.
8. What do we do with our on site systems? Will there be a cost to us? (Helen Somer)
   Depending on the type of on-site system you have, it may be abandoned in place with very little effort.  There may be a cost with regard to the “abandonment” process if the septic tank has to be filled, the access point buried or the tank removed all together.  The Township will assist homeowners in establishing wthe most cost conscious method of abandonment and will assist the homeowner wiythe Chester County Health Department, the regulating agency overseeing on-site disposal systems.
9. Why do we need to use the 60,000 GPD allotted to the township? 
   Is it to generate revenue for the township?
   In order to maintain the availability of the 60,000 GPD, the Township must use it with in a specified time after it becomes available.  Not all of it is available at present.  There are some “triggers” with respect to the construction of the disposal facilities within the new developments that  “start the clock”.  We expect the full 60,000 GPD to be available to us by December 31, 2008.  Therefore, we must commit the capacity before 2011. The Township is not a “for profit” agency.  The 60,000 GPD will have a user fee associated with it that will pay for the operating costs of the system and any debt service for bonds…nothing more.
10. When are our supervisors who were elected by the residents of Upper Uwchlan  Township going to wake up and start representing their residents by:
    Stop overlooking the mistakes John J. Roughan Jr is making
    Stop coating issues by saying they (the residents) are overreacting
    Fire John J. Roughan at once!
    No comment to be offered.
11. Isn’t it insincere to make claims about no tax increases previously used to pay for repairs or replacements of on –lot or community septics.  Of course no one would expect that the township would pay these costs.  It is not the same thing as a community or township-wide sewer.
    No comment to be offered.
12. When are supervisors up for reelection? Is John Roughan appointed or elected? Does the citizenry have input into his job evaluation/retention?
    The Board of Supervisor’s names and terms of office are available on the Township website at www.upperuwchlan-pa.gov
    John J. Roughan, Jr., the Township Manager, is appointed by the Board of Supervisors.
    The citizenry has input on the job performance of all Township employees through their communication with the Board of Supervisors.
13. Why didn’t the township tell us this sooner instead of scaring us with the $40,000 figure?
    The Township did not seek to scare anyone regarding the $40,000. figure.  As stated at the June 29, 2006 meeting, a figure of $36,000 for the Windsor Place development only was used at a recent joint meeting of the Board of Supervisors and the UUTMA.  The respective boards were exploring financing options and requested from staff to put together some options based upon the worst case scenario.  The $36,000 figure for Windsor Place was the highest individual cost for any development slated for public sewer on a per home basis.
    As stated by Supervisor Kerr at the June 26 meeting, the Township should have done a better job of explaining what that meant rather than allowing the township “grapevine” to cause serious concern.
14. What options are being explored to acquire additional land to expand the current 60,000 gpd capacity? (John Mish)
    Please see the answer to Question No. 1.
15. As capacity for disposal is found how will the costs be distributed? Bond?
    The Township is performing exploration now so as to determine at the time a bond would be floated (2008) if additional lands are available.  The cost of the property would be included within any borrowing and recovered through the sewer user fees.
16. What is the purpose of increasing capacity to 800,000 if not to extend service to the entire community?
    The agreement with the developers allows for an increase in the capacity of the WWTF and the disposal fields up to a maximum capacity of 800,000 GPD if needed.  There is a major cost for this to be borne entirely by the developers to provide sewerage capacity exclusively for properties they own and develop.  The disposal fields are limited to 60,000 GPD for the Township.  For the Township to expand service the entire community, significant land for disposal would need to be acquired at a very high cost by the Township. Also, the cost of the WWTF upgrade would be borne by the Township.  This is not a reasonable consideration.
17. Is the township prepared to pay for an on-going legal battle that the residents are mounting to stop a mandatory sewer system that duplicates a service they’ve already bought?
    No comment is offered.
18. You said developments outside box have no proposed costs because there is no plans.  There are 4 color coded developments with phase #’ on them.  #7-8-9-10, outside the box.  How can you say your statement is true?
    The color-coded developments outside the box are areas where over the past three (3) years the Township has received requests or inquiries from homeowners for public sewer service.  Therefore the Township color-coded the developments with the intent that should additional disposal capacity come available, these areas could receive public sewerage.  The Township has no disposal capacity for these areas at present (See answer to Question No. 1).  Therefore, no plans exist to sewer these areas other than their inclusion on a color-coded map.  However, should we find additional disposal sites, we will then attempt to provide sewerage capacity to the color-coded areas outside the black box. 
19. If you float a bond to finance the system infrastructure that will be paid quarterly by the users, what happens when the debt is paid off?
    The UUTMA and the Township are not profit-making entities.  Any user rate must consider operating costs and debt service.  Once the debt service is paid off (15 or 20 years in the future), it is very likely and additional borrowing will be necessary in the course of upgrading and replacing aging equipment.  This amount, however, will not be similar in size and scope to the initial infrastructure investment.  And, the debt service for the additional borrowing should fit into the then existing user rate scale without impact.
20. Does the township have anyone with the experience to successfully manage/oversee a project of this magnitude?  Will residents have a place on an “oversight commission?”  Will sewer coverage expand beyond the plan presented today?  (Joe Stoyack, Rosemary Lane)
    The Township is currently evaluating the inclusion of a full-time staff member with the necessary experience to manage/oversee this project who will work with the consultants and report directly to the UUTMA. 
    There are no plans to establish an “oversight” commission” for the sewer project.  However, both the Board of Supervisors and the UUTMA welcome the comments and suggestions of all Township residents towards the success of the project. 
    No plans exist or are being considered to expand sewerage service beyond what has been presented today.
21. Major benefit of public sewers now is the reduced infrastructure costs that are being assumed by grants & developers.  True or false?
    That is true and is a benefit to our Township.  The developers are funding a major portion of the infrastructure thereby lowering the cost to the residents and businesses.  With out the developer contribution, public sewer would not be affordable.
22. What’s timeline for Phase 8 (Surrey?? Carriage?? Etc.)
    No timeline exists at present.  There is no disposal capacity available for that area.  Should additional disposal area be found, sewerage for this developments could not be any sooner than 2010.
23. What does tapping fee mean?
    Does lateral fee include installation?
    A tapping fee is a fee that is authorized through PA Code (Act 57 of 2003), that permits municipalities to recover some of the capital value of a water or sewer system through an up front fee to new connectors.  It also provides for a “reimbursement’ component that when developers contribute to the cost of public infrastructure, the developer is reimbursed a portion or all of the tapping fee to help offset their costs.  The agreement between the developers and the Township specifies the Township will charge a tapping fee and will provide reimbursement to the developers through the tapping fee.  The Township will be receiving as a contribution $19.6 Million in contributed infrastructure (Phase I of the WWTF only) initially.  In return will be reimbursing the developers $1.3 Million through the tapping fees.
    The cost of the individual laterals quoted at the meeting does include installation.
24. At the meeting in May we were told lateral costs would be 8,000 – 10,000 in addition to the tapping fee – Why the back pedaling?
    The Township has never stated the cost of the laterals would be $8,000 to $10,000.  That has always been the estimated cost of the laterals and the tapping fee combined (See the answer to Question No. 5).
25. What options are being investigated for additional land disposal capacity?
    See the answer to Question No. 1.
26. What is the estimated connection date for phase 5 Dorothy Ln/Christine Dr?
    After Phase II of the WWTF is completed (December 31, 2008).  We estimate late 2009 or early 2010 for Eagle Manor.
27. ARRO Consultants (Matt Brown) has designed systems using Grinder pumps in other communities, but is not recommending them in Upper Uwchlan.  Westtown uses both Gravity and Grinder Pumps in their Sewer System. What specifically, do Supervisors and Consulting Engineer have against Grinder Pump system?
    The Supervisors and ARRO have absolutely nothing against low-pressure sewer systems utilizing grinder pumps.  In certain applications, it is the best and possibly only option for providing sanitary sewer service.  ARRO recommends them frequently.  At present, the Township and ARRO are evaluating several options that include gravity sewers, low-pressure sewers and a combination of both for the residential areas who will receive sewerage.
28. Is there a discussion between Wallace Township and Upper Uwchlan to transfer land, revise zoning for additional spray fields?  If so, who will benefit from that exchange?
    To date, there has been a discussion between the Township and Wallace Township regarding a limited amount of land on the Popjoy property within Wallace Township that has shown some promise as a possible site for land disposal.  There have been no discussions on land transfer or revised zoning.  Our Township is seeking permission from Wallace Township to conduct an investigation on the property for the stated use.  A presentation seeking that permission was made at a meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Wallace Township by representatives of Upper Uwchlan Township.  We currently await their response. 
    The benefit will be to the developments outside the black box in the event the land is tested and shows that it can support a disposal system.  UUTMA can then consider sewering some of the color-coded areas.
29. Are you actively seeking additional land disposal capacity?  If so, and if you succeed in getting additional land disposal, do you plan to expand public sewers to phase 3 through 10 on the map?
    We are actively seeking additional disposal areas for the Township (See answer to Question No. 1).  If successful, the Township, depending on the amount of available disposal capacity, will seek to sewer those color-coded areas outside of the black box on the map.
30. If additional land disposal area is found, what are the current plans to fund the acquisition of that land?
    See the answer to Question No. 15.
31. Elaborate on any plans or intentions you have to build use or operate a sewer treatment or land disposal facility in what is currently part of Wallace Township Land?
    See the answer to Question No. 28.
32. When will the public sewer be made available to those in the township – outside the black box & will it also be available at a cost of $10,000 (since a failed system is 20,000 – 35,000 cost)
    Public sewer outside the black box will only be made available if the Township is successful at locating additional land suitable for disposal.  If the areas currently under review show sufficient capacity to use as a disposal site, work on connecting developments outside the black box could commence as early as 2010. 
    It would be the intention of the Township to hold the cost to all the residents connecting to the public sewer to the sum of the tapping fee and the lateral connection.  This estimated to be $10,000 now and for the duration of this project.
33. Are there any concerns about Sewage Plant capacity over the next 5 years?  - Over the next 10 years? Is the 800,000-gallon capacity the maximum based on the Plant and/or land for disposing treated effluent?
    There are no concerns over the WWTF capacity over the next five (5) years or the next ten (10) years.  Connections to the system are closely monitored because of the limitations on land disposal capacity.
34. How will you fund future infrastructure outside the box?
    It is the intention of the Township to include any possible sewer infrastructure outside box within the same bond issue as those inside the box.
35. If I am currently outside the box, will it still only cost me 10,000 when you do come into my neighborhood?
    See the answer to Question No. 32.
36. If we live outside the black box what kind of “grant” money will be left for us to get our pipes, stations & lateral connection paid for?
    See the answer to Question No. 34.  The residents will remain responsible for the cost of their tapping fee and lateral connection estimated at $10,000.
37. Why was notice mailed to residences outside the black box?
    The Township was unaware of the extent of the misinformation that was shared concerning the cost of $40,000 for sanitary sewer.  Therefore the Township wanted to make sure no one was left out with the notice.  Evryone was free to come and attend any and all public meetings.
38. Who pays Matt Brown’s salary and why township (taxes) or builders. Why don’t we stop building, wouldn’t that help the water issue? Why wasn’t this thought about before all the development? What guarantees do we have outside the black box that we won’t be affected by this in the future?
    Matt Brown is an employee of ARRO.  They pay his salary.
    No, the new development has sewer capacity set aside that is distinct to each development.  It is unlikely the Township could stop the building.  However if we could, it would have no affect on this issue.
    It was considered. An ACT 537 Amendment was filed with the PADEP in 1999/2000 delineating the plans for public sewer within the Route 100 corridor that included the new development and sewering areas of the Villages of Eagle and Byers.
    There are no guarantees. Disposal capacity dictates how many residences can connect to public sewer.  There is, however, a severe limitation on the amount of disposal capacity available. 
39. We are not in the present district, in the event we wish to sell will the township/municipal authority provide written documentation of plan for our area?
    Yes, the Township will provide the appropriate written documentation regarding public sewer.
40. Why do the minutes of previous township meetings (posted on your website) quote costs to the homeowner in the 30,000 range, not including tapping & lateral fee? If this information was “preliminary” who do we know that tonight’s info isn’t also “preliminary”?
    That information was preliminary.  It was meant to quote costs to the homeowner only under certain financing conditions.  The Township was not afforded an opportunity to develop all the ideas and answers needed before the misinformation was circulated.  The information being presented now is also preliminary.  We are further in our analysis but it still requires extensive review by the Township staff, the Board of Supervisors and the UUTMA.
41. We’re outside the black box.  What are the plans for these areas?  When will they be discussed?  I realize I won’t be serviced by the Fellowship Road Facility.
    At present there are no plans to sewer areas outside of the black box in that land disposal capacity is very limited.  Should additional capacity be discovered, the colored areas outside the black box will be considered first.  They are areas where the Township has received requests for sewerage over the past several years
42. What are we going to do for the areas outside the box because on-lot systems will continue to fail at a rapid rate
    The Township will continue to assist homeowners with methods and means to resolve on-lot failures.  The Township will also continue its search for additional disposal area so more can receive the benefits of public sewers.
43. Do you plan to acquire more land for wastewater disposal to eventually include all of Upper Uwchlan Township?  If yes, will hook-up be mandatory for all?
    Yes, it is the intention of the Township to continue to search for land disposal area to sewer more of the Township.  However, the chance of finding sufficient capacity to sewer the entire Township is extremely remote.  If the Township finds additional disposal area and can sewer more developments and if the infrastructure costs are borne by the Township for those developments, connection will be mandatory.
44. Are these any discussions to permit a tie-in of an Upper Uwchlan Township property into the Marsh Creek Interceptor?  If yes, which properties and why?
    There are no discussions involving the Township supervisors, staff or consultants concerning a connection with the Marsh Creek Interceptor.
45. If more land disposal capacity if found, will people outside the box be brought into the public sewer system?
    Yes, as previously stated.
46. Do you have any plans to use eminent domain to acquire more land for disposal?
    No, there are no plans to use eminent domain to acquire more land for disposal.
47. When will homes within the box be able to connect to public sewer?
    Connections of residential developments within the black box are expected to begin in mid 2009.
48. Since we are in a pristine watershed why were the developers allowed to build in the first place?
    The developers had/have the responsibility to comply with all state, county and township requirements.  If they do so, it is difficult and even impossible without infringing on their rights to prevent them from building.  The developers have adhered to all requirements thus permitting them to build.
49. How will the residents be able to pay the $10,000?  financing of the $10,000 option
    As part of the review process of the financing, the Township supervisors have included payment programs for those homes where the initial monies ($10,000) are a hardship.
50. When phases 2 & 3 of the Fellowship Road treatment plant go on line will sewer then go to the remaining neighborhoods?
    No, land disposal capacity governs how many connections can be made.  The 60,000 gpd of land disposal capacity for Township use remains unchanged as the WWTF is expanded.
51. What is the extra 240,000 gallons per day at Fellowship targeted for?  60,000 versus 240,000
    In Phase I of the Fellowship Road WWTF (300,000 gpd), any capacity not belonging to the Township is capacity for the new developments.
52. How much capacity is needed to service the black boxed areas?
    The colored areas within the black box utilize the total of the Township 60,000 gpd disposal capacity
53. Has phase 2 at Fellowship started construction yet?
    No, design of the expansion is in progress.  URS, Inc. is performing the design; the developer group is paying their fees.
54. If there is no plan for those outside the box hook up to the sewer system, why are they still included in the phase plan?
    Areas outside the black box that have been colored and included within the phase plan are those where interest in public sewer has been expressed to the Township.  This interest has been expressed over a several timeframe.  If the Township can find additional land for disposal of treated effluent, it would be the intent of the Township to bring public sewer to those areas.  To date, no plans are underway in that no additional land disposal capacity is available. 
55. What about Stonehedge that has already paid $20,000?
    There were 27 homes within Stonehedge that utilized a community on-lot disposal system (COLDS).  The drain field for this system failed and the Authority was under directive from the Chester County Department of Health to take immediate action.  The Authority was fortunate to have the Greenridge development under design nearby thereby allowing the Stonehedge group to be included.  Had the group in Stonehedge undertaken construction of a new system on their own, the cost could have been substantially higher.  The Authority assessed the residents in Stonehedge $20,000 per home to pay for capacity and conveyance in the Greenridge facility.  It had been the practice of the Authority to make each system financially self-sufficient through requiring those connected to the system to pay for upgrades.  What is being proposed for the Township capacity in the Fellowship Road facility is a departure from this practice.
56. Will there be additional cost to link over the Sunoco gas line?
    The Sunoco gas line has nothing to do with public sewer.
57. Do you have to have public water to have public sewers?
    No.
58. When will the township make a decision with regard to the financing option?
    A decision is expected to be made before the end of 2006.
59. Why did we construct a $300,000 process capacity with only 60,000 disposal capacity?
    There is 300,000 gpd land disposal capacity to serve the 300,000 gpd WWTF.  The Township only receives 60,000 gpd of that disposal and treatment capacity.  The balance goes to the new developments.
60. Because you are obviously over your head with development, will you consider a moratorium on future building until you get your act together?
    While the new development in the Township has been quite significant, there are no plans for a moratorium at this stage. Most of the available land has already been committed and approved.
61. My home is within the “black box”. My home currently has “public sewer”.  What does this mean to me?
    Absolutely nothing.  You will pay no additional fees and it is expected that your $175/ quarter sewer user fee will not change.
62. What is the average gallon per day per residential household?
    For planning purposes the Township uses 225 gpd per household.
63. How can you justify the cost of hookup to someone with a functioning on-site sewage system?
    While the system may be functioning today, at some point it will most likely fail. This is a singular opportunity to connect to public sewer thereby eliminating the future costs of mitigating a failing septic system.
64. Why do all existing residents have to pay a “tapping” fee to developers of new homes?
    Only those connecting to the Fellowship Road WWTF will pay a tapping fee.  The tapping fee was part of the agreement between the Township and the developers.  In this manner, a small part of the developer’s investment in public sewer is offset by a reimbursement.  The Township will acquire 20% of the capacity in Phase I of the facilities and the total tapping fee payment will be approximately 6.6% of the cost to provide Phase i.
65. Does your user fee include maintenance money for the treatment plant, or is that amount an additional fee?
    Maintenance and repair is included within the quarterly user fee.
66. Does the single sewer district/bond issue illustrated by Matt apply to the entire township, or just to the black box scope?
    It applies to the entire Township serviced by all eight (8) of the treatment systems.
67. When will Phase 10 begin?
    There are currently no plans to include Phase 10.  Public sewers for this area are dependent upon finding additional land for disposal.  At present, the Township has limited disposal capacity.
68. Is Moore Road getting sewer?
    No.
69. If the areas in white are not going to be receiving public sewer, why is the township currently looking at and testing land to be used for future sewer treatment areas? 
    Why are you seeking land purchases if there will be no public sewers to these areas?
    The Township needs additional land for effluent disposal in order to provide public sewers to the colored areas outside of the black box.  The areas in white are not being considered for public sewers.
70. What are the “real” plans for the Moser/Popjoy property & how will environmental impact of a spray field so close to the lake be determined?
    The “real” plans for the portion of the property in Wallace Township are dependent on the Board of Supervisors in Wallace Township.  Upper Uwchlan Township has made a request of Wallace to conduct investigation on the property to determine the feasibility to use as an effluent disposal area.
    The appropriate environmental impact studies as required by PADEP and PADCNR will be preformed on the area to determine the impact of an effluent disposal area on the lake.
71. Are the homes within the box going to have to remove or fill the existing septic tanks?  John Roughan said no – you just said yes!!
    The homes for whom public sewers will be extended will be required to retire their septic systems.  Depending on the type of system and the construction, this could mean that no action is required or it could mean that filling or removal is required.  It will be determined by the Chester County Health Department on a case by case basis.
72. Will homeowners get an itemized list to breakdown the cost of the sewers?
    Yes, any homeowner who requests the information can get an itemized list of the costs after construction is complete.
73. Is replumbing the house to bring sewer out of the front of the house instead of the rear included in the costs quoted?
    Yes, that was considered in the estimate of lateral costs.
74. What will happen to homeowners who can’t afford the sewer?  Will the township put liens on our homes?
    Under the scenario of the sewer revenue bonds, the homeowners will not be required to provide any up front monies for the public sewerage.  The only costs recognized by the individual homeowners will be the tapping fee and lateral costs estimated at around $10,000.
75. What are the time periods for starting and completing public sewer for areas in the black box?
    Extending public sewers to the commercial areas within the black box has begun.  It is estimated that work will be completed by the end of 2008.  Sewers for the residential developments within the black box are scheduled for installation during 2009 and 2010.
76. Why have the costs estimates been taken off of the map?
    The cost estimate were out dated and based upon very preliminary information on front footage.  In that no sewers are planned for the area outside the black box without additional disposal area, the Township was concerned that information could be confusing.  Hence, the cost estimates were removed.
77. In response to question “What impact will this have on existing homes with public sewers” supervisor Kerr stated “no impact at all”  This is not true – we will have an increase in fees to pay the bond debt interest!
    As stated at the meeting, growth within the new developments is occurring at such a rapid pace that there most likely will be no increase in the user fees to pay the bond debt service.
78. When will Heather Hills receive public sewer? (from C J Booth)
    The schedule for Heather Hills is 2009 and 2010.
79. What is the time line?
    When will Eagle Manor have sewers?
    See the answer to Question No. 75.  Eagle Manor is scheduled for 2009 and 2010.  
80. If your home is inside the black box but not colored, when will that property be included in this process?
    If your home is inside th black box, is not colored and is not part of a new development where public sewers were installed, there are no plans to provide you with public sewers.
81. Why isn’t land disposal considered in the developer land lots?
    It is.  The developers must provide their own area for disposal on their sites.  Their disposal area must also include a minimum of 10 percent for Township use.
82. Please confirm the following as I understand it from presentation:
    upfront cost:  $8,000 - $10,000
    quarterly cost:  $175.00
    no other cost over time?  (other than increasing cost of living?)
    The numbers quoted are correct.  There may be some costs associated with retirement of the septic system.  This, however is determined on a case by case basis.  There are no other costs the Township is aware of at this time.
83. With the neighborhoods outside the box, how will the township assist the homes with failing systems?
    The Township can intercede on behalf of the homeowners with the Chester County Health Department; provide technical guidance on a repair or replacement, provide the names of suitable and qualified contractors and assist in expediting any permits required by the County or State.
84. How many gallons per day will the new developments use by the time they are complete?  Will developers pay for land to dispose?
    At present, there are plans in place for the developers to use approximately 565,000 gallons per day of capacity.  The developers will pay for all of their land disposal up-front costs as well as the Township’s.
85. Question background:  “Any engineering and design that is not covered by the Act 537 plan reimbursement is eligible to be included in the PENNVEST project.”  From the Pennsylvania Infrastructure Investment Authority
    Question:  Did UUT apply for and receive a PENNVEST LOAN to help pay for the cost of the WWTP expansion?
    No, the Township will pay nothing for the WWTF expansion.  This will be fully-funded by the developers.
86. My home currently has public sewer.  How much will I have to pay to support the bond issue debt?  For how long?
    You will continue to pay the user fee of $175 per quarter.  The cost of the infrastructure covered by the bond debt will likely prevent any reduction in that figure.  However, the growth within the new developments is expected to be robust enough to prevent any increases in that figure for years to come.
87. Since older developments like St. Andrews Brae is 20 years old do you estimate the tapping fee @ $6,000.
    The tapping fee is only for those residences connected to the Fellowship Road WWTF. There currently is no tapping fee resolution for the St. Andrews Brae system and none is anticipated.
88. Is this the first example of a Republican are becoming a socialist state?
    No comment to be offered.
89. Isn’t this the definition of socialism?
    No comment to be offered.
90. When will we get to vote on this?
    At present the Township Supervisors do not intend on putting the sewer issue to a public vote.
91. Can all those with failing systems raise your hand?
    No comment to be offered.
92. Does your $10,000 estimate include removal/retirement of existing tanks/drain fields on my property?
    No it does not.  If any work is required to retire the septic system those costs will be extra.
93. Clearly current residents of Upper Uwchlan lose because of the new sewer systems, so who wins?
    No comment to be offered.
94. Have any efforts been made to have the homeowners cost for the system declared by the state at a betterment to the public health system qualifying as a tax deductible fee.
    At present no efforts have been made along those lines.  The Township will explore this avenue to see if any benefits can be levied for the homeowners.
95. What are the Township’s plans and research to expand the area of land disposal capacity to exceed 60,000 to tie in the remaining areas of the township outside the frame?
    See the answer to Question No. 1
96. Why are you selecting and going through and picking questions?  They said this would not happen?
    During the public meeting the Township responded to questions in the order of receipt.  The only “selectivity” employed by the Township at the public meeting involved duplicate questions.  In that the time was limited, the Township sought to answer new questions and not repeat.  However, the township will answer all questions, even redundant questions, in this format.  The exception to this is responding to comments that involved inappropriate language or prejudicial slurs.
97. Can the proposed bond issue include the tapping fee cost in order to reduce the upfront cost?
    No, the tapping fee cost which includes a reimbursement component to the developers can not be included as part of the bond issue.
98. We’ve paid for our on-site septic system.  We’ve paid to have it pumped on a regular basis.  An additional tank has been installed to maximize the life and performance of the system.  Our septic system is up to code and when we purchased our home the township inspector approved the residence for occupancy. 
    As homeowners, we’re prepared to maintain our property whether the roof fails or the septic system fails.  Why have the township manager and the board of supervisors now considered it reasonable to force us to abandon our investment in our septic system, require that we pay to properly close the system, and over-pay or even pay for a new system – a system which also requires a monthly fee to be paid to the township?
    The Township believes the advantages of public sewers center around public health and the environment.  While there are many properly operating septic systems within the Township, a sufficient number of others have failed to create this concern.  In that the question posed indicates the responsible approach you have taken to your septic system, it is reasonable to assume you will be facing failure of the system someday.  Public sewers would prevent that eventuality.
99. Is there any impact on properties that already have public sewer service (specifically Heron Hill Drive)? (from Monique Streff, 18 Heron Hill)
    No impact other than to the user fees.  The proposed $175 per quarter for the single sewer district may be more or less than you currently pay and it will remain in place to cover proposed bond debt service.
100. Question (for Matt Brown)
     Question Background:  You have repeatedly said tonight that UUT does not have enough land for disposal of treated effluent beyond the Route 100 corridor.
     Question No. 1:  What happens when/if land becomes available?  You ARE currently negotiating for more land.
     Question No. 2:  How will expansion be determined?  Are you planning to continue by phase, as indicated on the map?
     Follow-Up Question:  What happens to neighborhoods with failing systems (the basis of the Plan) if land does not become available?
     If additional land for disposal becomes available, it is the intent of the Township to begin providing public sewerage to the colored areas outside of the black box.  At present, the order is as shown numerically by the phasing plan. Neighborhoods with failing septic systems may need to install alternative on-site systems.  This may be very costly.  The Township will assist the individual homeowners in maintaining costs as low as possible and through technical assistance.
101. What “rampant” misinformation” has been distributed?
     The main concern of the Township is the perception that all residents will be paying $40,000.  That has never been the intent and never has been stated by elected officials and/or township staff.  As addressed in earlier questions, there was a discussion about financing options that identified the cost of infrastructure, tapping fee and lateral as $36,000 for the Windsor Place development.  This estimate did not appy to any other development in the Township.  And, certainly not for those who will not receive public sewers.
102. For sale of property can we get a letter from the township stating we will not be getting sewers.  We are outside the box.
     Yes.  The Township has stated they will provide a letter to any and all concerned residents stating the exact plan for public sewerage for their home.
103. How much land do you need for disposal?    acres/gallons per day capacity
     The amount of land needed for disposal is dependent on several physical factors of a proposed site.  These factors include the type of soils (do they drain well or poorly?), slope of the property, depth to rock and groundwater characteristics to name a few.  Each site is distinct.
104. It is not reasonable that the current residents of UUT should pay for their own septic systems and subsidize the cost of a new sewer system for future homeowners of UUT.
     New developments are being authorized and built on lots too small for on-site septic systems.  Why hasn’t the township manager and the board of supervisors raised the lot size minimum to allow for on-site septic or required developers and those who eventually buy those homes to cover the cost of their waste disposal?
     The current resident of UUT are not subsidizing the cost of a new sewer system for future homeowners.  On the contrary, the developers constructing the new homes are paying for most of the new sewer system.  We expect current residents will be paying only the tapping fee and lateral costs up front.  When comparing the investment of the developers to the reimbursement of the tapping fee and the investment of the Township to the rate payments of the new homeowners versus current residents, new development is actually subsidizing a part of the sewerage for current residents.
105. Is UUT paying for the ARRO staff who are walking around collecting index cards with questions.
     Yes.
106. Why was no notice provided that the “plan” was available for public review & comment prior to submission to the DEP? The “plan” being the most recent Act 537 Plan.
     Under state law, any amendment or change in the Act 537 Plan requires public advertisement and pronouncement at a public meeting through a resolution of the Board of Supervisors.  The Township has adhered to this requirement strictly.  Any and all changes to the Act 537 Plan has been advertised in the Daily Local News, a 30 day comment period has been provided to the public and the appropriate resolutions passed at the meetings of the Board of Supervisors.
107. What is the minimum lot size requirement for use in land disposal? 
     Does the Authority/Township have potential sites in mind for future land disposal sites?
     See the answer to Question No. 103.
     See the answer to Question No. 1.
108. Is there a cost to closing down/removing current septic systems when new one come in?
     Possibly.  It depends on the type of septic system in place.  See the answer to Question No. 70.
109. Are all shaded areas within the current Act 537 Plan?  If not, what studies are being done to determine whether they should be?
     All properties within the Township are addressed within the current Act 537 Plan.  I they are slated for public sewerage, it so states.  If they are intended to have on-lot septic, it similarly so states.
110. Infrastructure question - On development outside box what is the estimated cost?
     The answer to that question is site specific.  In that there is no capacity in the land disposal system for areas outside the box, there is no cost.  Should additional land be discovered and one of the shaded developments included in the sewer system, the intention of the Board of Supervisors is to hold the cost to the lateral and tapping fee or approximately $10,000 per residence.
111. We got a letter from township last year we were in phase 1 with hook up in 2006 – Where did that plan go?  I see on map now it’s phase 4 (Why?) (Katy & Butch McQueen,  241 Park Road)
     The stated property is not in Phase 4 it is in Phase.  The map shading along Park Road is approximate to the length of sewers installed by developers.  The noted property is planned for hook-up in early 2007.  This is later than expected earlier this year due to delays of the developers to extend the lines that will eventually service the property.
112. If the $40,000 cost is a LIE and misinformation, why did the township distribute a letter with approx. $40,000 cost to the Windsor Place Development in May?
     The misinformation is that the $40,000 was for all developments in the Township.  The figure was $36,000 for Windsor Place alone.  That assumed the residents would be paying the full cost of the infrastructure, the tapping fee and the lateral.  It was quoted several times while the Board of Supervisors were directing staff to review financing options for public sewer. 
113. Are you willing to ask the audience whether they are in favor of implementing phase 3 through phase 10 – assuming capacity is available
     The audience does not represent the Township as a whole. It is the responsibility of the elected officials to make that decision when and if capacity is available.
114. I’m all for public sewer but really concerned about the cost.  If the cost is as Matt said, will there be any incentives for those prepay the 10k in advance? (101 Heather Hill Drive)
     The cost will be approximately $10,000, as Matt Brown stated.  There are no incentives being offered for those who prepay. 
115. Is the cost transferable if you sell your home?
     At the time the payment is requested, the then current owner will be responsible.  What agreements are reached between seller and buyer are distinct and are not the Township’s affair.
116. What is the duration, in years, of the bond, and when will $175 be reduced?
     15 and 20-year durations are currently being examined.  The Municipal Authority sets the sewer rates based upon cost.  Should reduction of the rates occur, it would be determined by first ensuring the cost of the service plus the debt is paid.
117. Why do new developments get the land w/ sewer when older developments can’t get the land for sewer – older developments have been paying taxes for 25-30 years, we should come first.
     The new developments must provide their owns land for sewage disposal.  They receive no preferences regarding available land. 
118. The method of constructing the infrastructure will effect the user cost.
     Is a low pressure system being considered for Windsor Place? 
     Is their a pumping station at 4 Buckingham Drive?
     A low pressure sewer system is being considered for Windsor Place.  However, this technology is not necessary best for all developments within the Township.
     No pumping station is being considered for construction on that property.
119. We are in Eagle Manor (Dorothy/Christine) being a circle with one way in and out.  How will they put in the systems? During heavy prolonged rain – such as we have had this past week – how will that effect the land disposal sites as far as possible runoff?
     The decision on the method of construction will be addressed during the detailed design phase.  This information is not yet available. Land disposal sites are affected by precipitation.  Rainfall is considered in the design of the distribution network and the storage facility.  During heavy rain periods, the effluent is stored for discharge during dry days.
120. Are there any set-back requirements (ie opt out) if you are 300” + from the street?
     We are located in the black box
     No, there are no “opt out” set backs for the sanitary sewer.
121. Will the $175 qrtly be all we have to pay after the tap in fee & lateral? 
     This is not a loan with a designated term, is it?
     Quarterly rates are all the users will need to pay to the Township after the sewers are installed. We are not estimating any change in the $175 figure for quite some time.
     The bond issue will have a designated term.  This will not be a loan.
122. Do you believe that the audience is in favor of expanding the system to include phases 3 through phase 10?
     See the answer to Question No. 113.
123. Is the township prepared to pay for our ongoing legal battle that the residents are mounting to stop a mandatory sewer system that duplicates a service they’ve already bought?
     No comment is offered.
124. You keep saying only within the box.  Is is not true that Stonehedge residents were forced on sewer at a cost of $20,000?  They are not within the box.
     See the answer to Question No. 54
125. Will the township confirm in writing those properties that will not now, or in the next 10 years, be forced to move to public sewer?
     See the answer to Question No. 102.
126. For those of us who live outside the black box, how do we find out more information on the 537 planning (versus public sewer planning) being done?
     Provide a written request to the Township to review the current Act 537 Plan and all amendments.  Inquiries at the meetings of the Municipal Authority will yield a response on what planning is in progress.
127. What is the estimated sewage usage fee to pay off the bond?
     The fee of $175/quarter is expected to cover the operating costs of the sewerage system and the debt service on the bond.
128. Why do residents need to pay for infrastructure? 
     What other townships have passed this cost on to residents?
     That portion of infrastructure not paid by contributors (i.e. developers) or by public grants are generally paid by the residents and businesses of the Township.  This applies to all townships.  The payment can be levied through taxes, user fees or assessment.
129. Additional costs to condemn or close existing septic systems above tap in fee?
     Why couldn’t existing septic tanks & drain fields be used for effluent dispersion (land disposal) if raw sewage can be pumped out, why can’t effluents be pumped back?
     That is dependent on the type of septic system utilized.  It could vary from $0 to $1,000.
     The cost of running a separate and distinct treated effluent system (pumps, piping, valves and appurtenances) makes this option cost prohibitive.
130. I am 300 feet from street my neighbor is 40 ft  I would have to pay 10k what they “tapping” fee to developers of new homes.
     Each residence would have to pay a tapping fee.  This fee has been calculated to be approximately $6,300.  The lateral cost will be variable depending on the distance from the street and several other factors.  We estimate the total cost to the average homeowner to be $10,000.
131. What additional value would public sewers add to property value?
     The Township is not in a position to quantify the dollar value of public sewers.  Clearly in Upper Uwchlan there is value to the environment as well.  Traditionally, real estate served by public utilities is attractive to prospective homebuyers.
132. Doesn’t the word customer imply that I want to purchase something.
     You explained the bond issue of payment but did not explain other options.
     At this point in time, the Board of Supervisors are not viewing other financing options in the best interest of the Township.  Options that included grants and special assessments were reviewed.
133. Budgetary information received recently indicates $870,492 expensed for Public Works, $2 Million for Engineering, and $160,000 for Debt Services
     Did the Twp apply for and receive a Planning Grant under PA Code Title 25 to pay for the cost of the Act 537 planning?
     The Township has applied for and received planning grant monies in an amount of 50% of the cost of the planning for any authorized changes to the Act 537 Plan.  In some cases, the Township has managed to negotiate contribution of the remaining 50% by the developers.
134. Are there debt procurement options for which the beneficiaries, rather than the entire township, bears the financial liability?
     The Township will/has not looked at any debt procurement option where the entire Township bears the financial burden.  Only those options where the beneficiaries bear the cost have been reviewed.
135. Why are you planning to expand that facility over the next four years?
     The developers will be expanding the Fellowship Road WWTF over the next several years to accommodate the needs of their developments as well as the balance of the Township’s treatment capacity not included in Phase I.
136. As the township manager and Board of Supervisors have given themselves the authority to require a hook up to a sewer system that a strong majority of current residents don’t need or want, what is the limit to your authority over residents, or can we expect mandatory new roofs or new driveways next?
     No comment is offered.
137. What is the township’s policy regarding freedom of information?
     How is information obtained?
     A written request to the Township can procure any public information.  Based upon the complexity of the request and the effort required to assemble, the Township may require a fee be paid to cover the appropriate costs.
138. If we pay for all the laterals & mains, will contractors be allowed to tap into “our” mains and laterals w/o paying a reimbursement fee to the residents who have payed for this infrastructure improvement?
     Should the developers desire to utilize Township funded facilities, the Township will require payment of fair and equitable compensation for their use.
139. What is the cost of either removing old septic systems or filling it up?  That amt is not included in the 10,000 – referred to at the meeting
     See the answer to Question No. 129.