2004-02-17 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

7 Ms. Richards said she does not see anything to prevent the si tuation of reduced usage and need to cover costs. She said nothing is in the report on a volume based rate structure. Ms. Scott said the rate is still volume based. She said the recommended structure is one staff feel can be done with our current syste m. She said other structures may be possible and can be explored when we get the new system. Mr. Lynch said he supports a seasonal rate with a 30% differential. He said individual rates would be difficult to do equitably. He said the increase in rates in the summer anticipates a reduction in demand. He said it may have to be revised over time. He said he supports expanding the rebate program. He said he does not agree with the rate stabilization fund. He said we are in a better situation now with R WSA with the cost allocation for new water supply. He said he favors the policy of increasing rates to get consumption down in a drought, tying the rates to the water supply. Mr. Schilling said the issue is what is most fair and how to best address our water usage. He said that after reviewing the report he thinks our current system is the most fair with minor adjustments. He asked who is subsidizing who with seasonal rates. He said it appears that year - round residents would be subsidizing U. Va. stud ents. He questioned whether the water rebate program makes sense now when water is flowing over the reservoir. He said he does not think the current situation dictates spending more money on it. He said he does not feel the need to spend more money now on conservation. He said he does not support the reserve fund. Mr. Caravati asked Ms. Scott to respond to Mr. Lynch's comments about the stabilization reserve. Ms. Scott said she could argue either way about the reserve. She said it could be used to offset rate increases or for a one - time need. Responding to a question from Mr. Caravati, Mr. O'Connell said he anticipates that RWSA's rates include a stabilization fund. Mr. Caravati said he favors the seasonal rate structure and expanding the reb ate program, but does not favor the stabilization reserve. Ms. Richards said she does not support the seasonal rates, does support expanding the rebate program, and does not support the reserve. Mr. Cox said he supports the seasonal rate with the 30% d ifferential, expanding the rebate program, and is undecided about the reserve. ORDINANCE : REZONING PROPERTY ADJACENT TO JOHNSON VILLAGE FROM 4 - 2/R - 1 MCINTIRE RIDGE RESIDENTIAL TO PUD Mr. Tolbert said that the Planning Commission and Council held a publ ic hearing on the rezoning on January 13 for the leftover Johnson Village property. He said the proposal is for three separate parcels. He said the applicants have proffered trails, picnic tables in a mini park, $70,000 to provide for expansion of the J ohnson School playground, and improved entrance signage for Johnson Village. He said the Planning Commission unanimously supported the rezoning on the condition that there is no connection from the existing Johnson Village. He said Fry's Spring neighborh ood is concerned with the traffic impact from the Cherry Avenue parcel, and he recommended that Council approve the rezoning without this parcel and refer it back to the Planning Commission so they can focus on the access issue. He said proffers one and t wo will also be referred back. Mr. Lynch expressed concern about parcel C and said if it will not hold up the project is there any reason not to pull it as well in order to notify that neighborhood.