Trumbull County Sanitary Engineer Gary Newbrough outlines a project to extend sewer service on North Stateline Road.
Ray Donahue is miffed that he will not be reimbursed for the $2,000 he spent to hire an engineer to design a sanitary sewer project for his home on North Stateline Road in Masury, but he certainly wants the project to be completed, now that Trumbull County has taken it over.
“I’ve been waiting for this project to be done for a long time now,” he said at a Feb. 5 public hearing. “I’ve been looking forward to this for a while.”
“I’m for it,” said Donahue’s wife, Kimberly. “As my husband said, I’m a little upset that we’re not getting the money back that we put into the project. 100 percent for it. Want it to be done and over with.”
Christopher Hawkins, who owns one of the seven properties that would be tied into Hermitage’s sewer system when the work is complete, said he has been unable to sell his property to his sister, who has lived on it for years, because of a failing septic system.
“I appreciate all your efforts, everyone in the building, everyone that’s contributed anything to this project,” he said. “It has been a very long time and a very long road. It’s finally, hopefully, coming to a conclusion in 2025.”
“I’m very thankful that, hopefully, this can all come to an end and it can actually be mine,” said Hawkins’ sister, Becky Zyvonoski.
No one spoke against the project at the public hearing, and it triggered a comment period that ended Feb. 14. Trumbull County Sanitary Engineer Gary Newbrough said Feb. 21 that the comment period passed without any opposition, and the commissioners formally approved the project at their March 5 meeting.
That approval will allow the Trumbull County Sanitary Engineer to advertise for bids and award a construction contract, Newbrough said. He said he hopes construction will start around July 1, and estimated there will be a 45-day construction period followed by a 30-day period for property restoration.
The project would install a main sanitary sewer line on the west side of Stateline Road, seven laterals to the property lines of the buildings that would tap in, two manholes, and a connection to the manhole on Crawford Drive in Hermitage, Newbrough said. The waste would flow to Sharon’s treatment plant.
The project originated in 2014 when seven property owners, faced with orders to replace their failing septic systems, banded together to hire an engineer to design a sanitary sewer extension connected to Hermitage’s system. However, one of the original property owners sold out and the new owner would not grant an easement for the project, said Chuck Miller, the sanitary engineer’s project manager.
While the county has a legal right to “appropriate the property necessary for a public project,” no such right exists for property owners undertaking a private project, Miller said.
The property owners filed a petition with the commissioners asking the county to undertake the project.
In 2021, the commissioners allocated $90,000 in American Rescue Plan Act funds for the project, and the sanitary engineer obtained a $75,600 no-interest loan from the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency to finance the rest.
The project construction cost is estimated at $138,430 with another $13,225 for county administration and inspection fees, advertising costs and Ohio EPA fees to obtain a state permit. The county also has budgeted a $13,945 contingency fund for cost overruns.
Residents, aside from paying a monthly sewer bill that will include a capital charge of up to $35 per month to pay off the loan over 30 years, will have to pay a $1,850 tap-in fee; $125 in plumbing and inspection fees to the Trumbull County Combined Health Department; the costs of any plumbing modifications to separate rain water from waste water; and the cost to run a line from the home to the sewer lateral at the property line.
However, the county has made available ARPA funds to cover all but the tap-in fee for income-eligible residents.
While residents will not get back the money they paid to the private engineering firm, “We wouldn’t be here tonight if you hadn’t invested in that engineering,” Newbrough said.
“That $10,000 you invested in the engineering was the primary driver as to why I asked for a petition for this project,” he said. “This is the smallest petition project ever taken by the county, and the main reason why is we didn’t want the $10,000 that you spent to go to waste.”
Newbrough added that the property owner investment “did reduce your capital charge for this project.”
“If not for that $10,000, that capital charge of $35 would be higher,” Newbrough said.
If the construction costs come in over budget, the county will eat the overage and residents will not pay more than the $35 a month capital charge for the work, he said. If costs come in under budget, the capital charge could go down, he said.
