Laserfiche WebLink
<br />7.4 <br /> <br />The rates are set up as follows: <br /> <br /> Inside city Outside city <br />Block cost/l000 !pils cgst/l000 llals <br />1 $0.81 $0.89 <br />2 $0.99 $1.09 <br />3 $1.43 $1.57 <br /> <br />Boulder's new rate structure does not have enough historical data to accurately <br />predict its impacts. To help predict the impacts, a similar rate structure with about 15 years <br />of data was studied. The City of Tucson. Arizona, adopted water pricing changes in June <br />1976. The City Council voted to adopt an increasing block rate structure, a system <br />development charge for new connections, and a system of eight lift zones so customers at <br />higher elevations would pay more for their water. This proved to be very unpopular with <br />Tucson residents, especially at the start of the peak summer watering season. Some families <br />living on large lots in the higher elevations saw their water bills suddenly skyrocket to over <br />$800 per month. <br /> <br />In response to the public outcry, the Tucson City Council and Water Department <br />formed a Citizens' Advisory Water Committee, conducted workshops to educate the public, <br />and implemented a conservation program aimed at reducing peak usage. In April 1977, new <br />water rates were adopted. These rates were even higher than the old rates, but the <br />unpopular lift charges and system development charges were dropped. There was a uniform <br />winter rate and an increasing block rate structure for summer residential water use. These <br />new, progressive' water rates were accepted by Tucson residents. Several studies have <br />concluded that water rate reform in Tucson, along with education and other conservation <br />measures, helped to dramatically lower that City's water use. Before July 1976, year-round <br />per capita- water use averaged about 185 gallons per day (gpd). By fiscal year 1978n9, <br />average use was down to 140 gpd. a 24-percent decrease. Summer use, as expected, <br />declined more than winter use. <br /> <br />In addition to the Tucson example, a considerable amount of empirical work has been <br />completed to relate changes in water demand to changes in water price. The most <br />comprehensive study is The !muact of Price on Residential Water Demand and Its ReJation <br />to Svstem Desill:ll and frice Structure. Howe and Linaweaver, 1967. In this reference, basic <br />data, as presented in Data Report of the Residential Wilter Use Research Proiect. <br />LJnaweavcr et al, 1966, was used to determine relationships relating interior residential water <br />consumption. maximum day water consumption. and peak-hour consumption to parameters <br />such as market value of dwelling unit, irrigatable area per dwelling unit, summer potential <br />evapotranspiration (ET), summer precipitation, and commodity charge. <br />