A recent Crestview filing with the City of Camarillo re: Well #8 states that, in order to mitigate the impact a new water well would have on existing septic systems, “Crestview will step into the shoes of any neighbor whose septic system repair or replacement encounters any issue arising out of Well #8.” The filing states that connecting the “dry” sewer system in that area to the public sewer system, a suggestion made by the City, is impractical financially.
This comes 37 months after Crestview filed the Well #8 application with the City and 28 months after neighbors of Well #8 suggested that something like this could resolve their objections to the original application. If Crestview is ready to do this for neighbors of Well #8, presumably it will also do the same for the neighbors of Well #7 or any other new well.
Crestview’s new position is potentially a breakthrough in its efforts to drill two new wells, but neighbors (and shareholders) will want to know about the details. For example, are there any distance limits on this offer–200 feet, 600 feet, or no limits? Will there be a recorded document that homeowners can show to buyers and lenders that will make them feel entirely comfortable? Is Crestview financially strong enough to perform this commitment to dozens of property owners? What will happen if the new well causes delays in septic system replacement permits in addition to higher costs? If the well causes a homeowner to incur extraordinary annual costs for septic system operating permits, will Crestview pay those too? Etc. etc.
Crestview’s letter to the City is here. For background on how a new public water well would, without mitigation, significantly reduce the property values of neighbors with septic systems, please read this prior post and this one.
Please forward this newsletter to other Crestview shareholders so they can sign up to receive future posts directly. Click on the Home tab and read earlier posts, or use the Tags word cloud or Search box to focus on a topic. Shareholders may comment below.
The question from the City, as stated in Crestview’s letter, concerns adjacent properties. I don’t know if the response from Crestview was well thought out as they seem to expand the scope, not only to adjacent properties, but neighbors.