4/10/1990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

M M increase to 16, they would, in fact, be liable for impact fees with no consideration of consumption. Director Pinto would not say that consumption is not con- sidered; it is considered on an individual unit basis, which is 0-250 gpd. Chairman Eggert believed it is considered that each individual bathroom uses 250 gpd, and what if all 16 only used that much. Director Pinto contended that this would be no different than if Rockridge as a whole added up all the use in their subdivision and said it should be charged by consumption. He stressed that this warehouse is not one big operation; it is individual units, each of which is rated at 0-250 gpd. Even if they use absolutely nothing, they are still rated as a single unit. Chairman Eggert asked how they came up with the figure for usage for motels, and Director Pinto advised that we do have a problem with motels. That was based on a national figure, and it turns out the rate is lower than it should be. We have a mistake there, and our recommendation is going to be that this should be increased. Chairman Eggert then brought up super markets, hair dressers where it is figured by the sink, etc., and Commissioner Scurlock advised that we have identified that those numbers also were based on national standards; we have found there is a problem; and that is exactly why we hired CH2M Hill to do the analysis. Director Pinto emphasized his belief that it is dangerous to fool around with the ordinance until the study is completed. Attorney Henderson believed it was recognized that the attempt to classify different uses could result in some inequi- ties, and he believed that is why Section 26 was adopted. They are simply asking that the county apply Section 26 and look at the unfairness that can result here. He contended they would be paying the same impact fees as an 80,000 sq. ft. building, and 15 BOOR �� F��"c �J