Welcome Guest! In order to take advantage of all the great features that Waterloo Region Connected has to offer, including participating in the lively discussions below, you're going to have to register. The good news is that it'll take less than a minute and you can get started enjoying Waterloo Region's best online community right away. Click here to get started.


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Water and Sewer
#31
Well, they're saying that 9.3% is needed for this year, but that within three years that can be reduced slightly. Above-inflationary increases for the next 16 years doesn't like fun, but there may not be alternatives.
Reply
#32
(11-25-2016, 08:00 AM)MidTowner Wrote: Well, they're saying that 9.3% is needed for this year, but that within three years that can be reduced slightly. Above-inflationary increases for the next 16 years doesn't like fun, but there may not be alternatives.

Suburb infrastructure will be the death of us yet.
Reply
#33
Increases are hard to look at, but relatively how do rates today compare to other cities? Do a few years of large increases catch us up to other areas, or are we in line to begin with?
Reply
#34
Kitchener, Waterloo, Wilmot and Woolwich are receiving some federal funding for some waste water infrastructure projects.

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/kitch...-1.4133599
Reply
#35
We talked (ages ago- and, sorry, I'm for some reason having difficulty quoting posts) a little about the different fee structures in different parts of the Region, with Tom pointing out that Woolwich has a large reserve charge.

I have a property in Kitchener that was recently vacant, and discovered that Kitchener effectively has a reserve charge, too: Kitchener Utilities levies a charge for a "minimum usage" of 3.1 cubic metres, even if less water is used.

This is regressive, though it's so low that it probably only impacts properties vacant for much or all of the billing period, and very few single person households. It is conceivable that a single person in a very small unit would use as little as 3.1 cubic metres a month, though, and that person would be penalized for using that little. His or her extremely modest usage on the basic necessities would be charged a higher rate than someone filling up his hot tub.
Reply
#36
(06-12-2017, 06:48 AM)MidTowner Wrote: We talked (ages ago- and, sorry, I'm for some reason having difficulty quoting posts) a little about the different fee structures in different parts of the Region, with Tom pointing out that Woolwich has a large reserve charge.

I have a property in Kitchener that was recently vacant, and discovered that Kitchener effectively has a reserve charge, too: Kitchener Utilities levies a charge for a "minimum usage" of 3.1 cubic metres, even if less water is used.

This is regressive, though it's so low that it probably only impacts properties vacant for much or all of the billing period, and very few single person households. It is conceivable that a single person in a very small unit would use as little as 3.1 cubic metres a month, though, and that person would be penalized for using that little. His or her extremely modest usage on the basic necessities would be charged a higher rate than someone filling up his hot tub.

Is there a connection fee? Even an unused connection requires maintenance (over time) so it’s entirely reasonable that there be a small fee that is not associated with actual use. Doing it as a minimum is a bit weird but probably doesn’t make a huge difference.
Reply
#37
There is no connection fee in Kitchener, but the minimum charge effectively serves as one- it's usually termed a reserve charge for water in other jurisdictions.

Quite possibly we should have a flat reserve charge or connection charge to reflect the basic maintenance needed that has no relation to the amount of water carried. I think that, if so, it should be based on frontage, to reflect the extra infrastructure some properties require over others.
Reply
#38
(06-12-2017, 06:48 AM)MidTowner Wrote: This is regressive, though it's so low that it probably only impacts properties vacant for much or all of the billing period, and very few single person households. It is conceivable that a single person in a very small unit would use as little as 3.1 cubic metres a month, though, and that person would be penalized for using that little. His or her extremely modest usage on the basic necessities would be charged a higher rate than someone filling up his hot tub.

I hit that when I lived in Kitchener. Daily shower/bath, toilet, and hand-washed dishes come out comfortably below the minimum charge. (I didn't have laundry, water softener, etc.)
Reply
#39
Some photos from this past weekend's "Doors Open" event, from the top of Pioneer Tower, of the new $300+ million depoopifier.

   

   

   
For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply
#40
Thanks Canard for the pictures, have to +1 the tower crane count.
Reply
#41
On the subject of depoopification, has there been any recent update on the Region's biosolids strategy?
Reply
#42
The Record: Kitchener water, sewer rates likely to jump 6.5 to 7 per cent in 2018

I'm hopeful that as people see increasing water and sewer rates, it will be an opportunity to learn about the true cost of sprawl.
Reply
#43
(09-19-2017, 08:15 AM)timc Wrote: On the subject of depoopification, has there been any recent update on the Region's biosolids strategy?

This page is generally kept up to date: http://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/aboutT...Solids.asp. No news that I know of since the public survey closed.
Reply
#44
(09-26-2017, 09:50 AM)highlander Wrote: The Record: Kitchener water, sewer rates likely to jump 6.5 to 7 per cent in 2018

I'm hopeful that as people see increasing water and sewer rates, it will be an opportunity to learn about the true cost of sprawl.

A really good way to do this would be something along the lines of a frontage charge. Currently, you contribute to the upkeep of our system based on the volume of water you consume, whether you consume that water as an apartment-dweller sharing infrastructure with hundreds of other occupants, or someone living on a suburban lot with a sixty foot frontage.
Reply
#45
(09-26-2017, 12:32 PM)MidTowner Wrote:
(09-26-2017, 09:50 AM)highlander Wrote: The Record: Kitchener water, sewer rates likely to jump 6.5 to 7 per cent in 2018

I'm hopeful that as people see increasing water and sewer rates, it will be an opportunity to learn about the true cost of sprawl.

A really good way to do this would be something along the lines of a frontage charge. Currently, you contribute to the upkeep of our system based on the volume of water you consume, whether you consume that water as an apartment-dweller sharing infrastructure with hundreds of other occupants, or someone living on a suburban lot with a sixty foot frontage.

Heh, tricky slope.  I've often wondered what would change if you were billed based on the type of road you live on.  You could pay less in taxes if your road was a through street, more if it is a cul-de-sac for example.  I.e., what percentage of the use of the road is yours alone.  

But I think there is a lot of consideration around such ideas.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)