Laserfiche WebLink
Davidson: <br /> <br />Mayer: <br /> <br />Howard: <br /> <br />this is a fairly conservative <br />estimate of what it's going to cost <br />to bring a new house on line in <br />Louisville in terms of the raw water <br />costs and the cost of the new Water <br />Treatment Plant. Personally, I <br />think this is less than it should <br />be. A1 so, it's been my strong <br />belief that we haven't been getting <br />the park space, the ball fields, and <br />the general open space that we will <br />need with the 12% dedication. I <br />would like people to know that in <br />terms of the service expansion fee, <br />staff is still calculating what the <br />full costs to the City are. I was <br />thinking in terms of phasing from <br />$2.50 to $2.75 is well justified. I <br />would favor giving staff the <br />additional time to come up with <br />definitive numbers in this area. <br />Finally, the differential charge <br />between multi-family and single <br />family, the final recommendation is <br />that townhomes be assessed with the <br />first unit at full cost and <br />additional units at 80%, other types <br />of multi-family, primarily <br />condominiums, apartments under the <br />old formula, since townhomes make <br />additional demands upon the water <br />facilities. I feel this is <br />justified. <br /> <br />Was it your original intent for the <br />ordinance to read "for a 5% annual <br />increase", or is it the intent for <br />it to be reviewed annually for an <br />increase? It doesn't call for that <br />in here. <br /> <br />I was wondering about that. I <br />think, as was done in the past with <br />the water rate increases, those were <br />set for a three year period. I <br />think it would be wise for the next <br />three years to build in a 5% <br />increase. <br /> <br />I would prefer that there be a <br />review every year prior to <br />committing to a 5% increase. I <br /> <br /> <br />