Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Don Frohlich, 491 Topaz, Redwood City Planning Commissioner, spoke to <br />Council regarding inequities in the current system <br /> <br />Lawrence Christianson, 3102 Oak Knoll Drive, asked Council for phone numbers <br />to report running water in the street <br /> <br />Mayor La Berge asked if anyone else wished to speak. <br />speak. <br /> <br />MIS: MurraylBuchan to close the public hearing. <br />Carried by unanimous voice vote and hearing was closed at 11:00 p.m. <br />MINUTE ORDER NO. 91-070 <br /> <br />No one else wished to <br /> <br />MIS: at 11:01 p.m, MurraylBuchan to continue the Council Meeting to <br />11:30 p.m. <br />Carried by unanimous voice vote. MINUTE ORDER NO. 91-071 <br /> <br />Councilman Claire offered his preferences regarding the proposed <br />Recommendations noted above: <br /> <br />(1) Agrees the water allocation program should meet the allocations <br />provided by San Francisco Water Department <br />(2) Not in favor of reduced rate for banking. Unit per unit works. <br />(3) Every unit allocated to new construction is one less for existing <br />users, and new homes and buildings create demand for more City <br />services. Need more information before decision on building <br />moratorium. <br />(4) Agrees that excess use charges should be increased. <br />(5) Creation of Public Use category is excellent. <br />Although current plan has inequities, per capita does not seem to be <br />the answer. Perhaps a two-tiered system such as California Water <br />Service would be better; or the following allocations based on 1987 <br />usage: <br />10 - 20 units <br />20 - 30 units <br />over 30 units <br /> <br />used - allocation of 14 units <br />used - allocation of 14 units plus 50% of anything over <br />used - 24 units maximum <br /> <br />Councilman Murray offered his preferences regarding the proposed <br />Recommendations noted above: <br /> <br />(5) Congratulated Committee on recommendation of Public Use category. <br />(4) Originally Council did not support high excess use fees, but supported <br />restrictors. It would be better not to rely on money to reduce <br />overuse. <br />(3) Agrees that moratorium is not needed at this time, but discussion was <br />helpful. Water is like traffic and crowdedness and affects quality of <br />life. <br />(2) 20% not enough to encourage banking. Unit per unit is best. <br />(1) No justification to revise current allocations at this time. <br />Inequities should be remedied but cannot be done before April 29, 1991. <br /> <br />Regular Meeting Minutes <br />April 15, 1991 <br />Page 5 <br /> <br />MINUTE BOOK NO. 50 <br />Page No. 230 <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />