Date:March 18, 1998
To:North York Community Council
From:Steve Andrews, P. Eng.,
Deputy Commissioner of Public Works
North York Office
Subject:BUILDING WATER RATES, NORTH YORK
CENTRE SOUTH, WARD 9,
89 LARKFIELD DRIVE
Purpose:
The owner of 89 Larkfield Drive. (Mr. D. Finnie) has requested that the building water rate in the amount of $416.00
which was paid under Municipal Services Application number 004701 be refunded as he used water from his neighbours
during construction of the new house at the subject location.
Source of Funds:
N/A
Recommendations:
It is recommended that the building water rate not be refunded. Mr. Finnie had water available from the existing old water
service on the property.
Council Reference/Background History:
A memorandum dated January 16, 1998 was received by this Department from Committee Secretary, Ms. C. Davidovits
requesting a report be submitted to the Community Council in reply to Mr. D. Finnie=s letter dated December 15, 1997.
Building Water Rates are monies charged to an applicant in conjunction with the fee for a new water service connection
for any water that may be used by the builder during construction, prior to the installation of a meter.
- 2 -
In accordance with Works Committee Report 2, Clause 4, as adopted by Council on January 26, 1981, by resolution 81-3,
building water rates for all buildings were set at $1.28 per $1000.00 of building value. These values were used to establish
the building water rate of $416.00 at this location.
Water By-law 32789 states, AA flat rate unmetered charge for water for use in building construction shall be made at the
time of application for a new water service.@
Mr. Finnie applied and paid for a new water service connection and building water rates on August 13, 1997. A meter was
installed at 89 Larkfield Dr. on February 5, 1998. Records indicate that the new water service connection was installed by
the City on September 12, 1997. The old water service connection, on the property, which could have been used by the
builder until this date, was disconnected.
Conclusions:
In view of the 1981 Council decision and the current Water By-law 32789, it is advised that no action be taken.
Steven P. Andrews, P. Eng.,
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
