upr000062 282

Kat Present Proposed Biff. Ho. Involved Monthly Increase hotels! ?*“ first 10 rooms, without toilet or bath #2 .50 #3.00 #.50 27 I 13.50 Each additional room .15 .20 .05 590 29.50 Toilet-private for one room .15 .25 .10 484 46*40 Toilet-private for two rooms .25 .30 .05 22 1.10 Bath-private for one room .15 .25 .10 460 46.00 Bath-private for two rooms .25 .30 .05 22 1.10 Water elosets-public .50 .60 .10 1,131 113.10 Urinals - public .50 .60 .10 72 7.20 ‘f-S'VvOvvT e ameeer The 50-cent Increase per month for the private hous< represents an increase of 33-1/3$> however , such a five-room house with toilet and bath would have a proposed rate of §2.55 as compared to §2.00, or an Increase of 55 cents or 27*5$. Bungalow courts and motels, under this classification, are understood to be exclusive of kitchen accomodations. When the latter exist they are classified as apartments. the proposed increase of 25 cents per month or 25$ for courts without toilet and bath and but 16-2/3$ increase with toilet and bath appear somewhat low. Especially is this so when such lower rates are compared to other dwelling accomodations, and when thet*- are further reduced by a vacancy allowance. There are no such allowances pro­vided for in the filed tariffs and none are believed justified. If such credit allowances are to be made then a high flat rate should be charged with a minimum charge provision for each court and/or dwell­ing accomodation. Apartment house rates appear to be in line and the proposed 50-eent increase proper. Hotels present a more difficult class of water service to handle on a flat rate. At the present time such rates appear some­what low. The proposed rates would result in an increase of approxi-