I previously considered the definition of a public vs private utility (i.e. elec, gas, water and septic) straight forward. Since then, I’ve been waffling back and forth on this. Refer to the 1004, p. 1, Site section for the context.
My original definition of public vs private utility was whether the utility provider was a public entity (such as a city) or a private entity (such as a community water well for a subdevelopment). This led to many interesting and lengthy discussions on whether a utility was public or private based on the utility providers classification. This turns into a gray area very quickly for many utility providers.
Since then, I’ve come to the conclusion this discussion is irrelevant in the 1004 context. My latest interpretation is the 1004 is really asking if the utilities are private to the Subject. The primary information being asked for is whether the Subject’s utilities are contained on site (i.e. private, such as a septic system or water well) or obtained from another source (i.e. public, any outside source is considered public in this context). This is much simpler than my earlier definition and more accurately describes the private vs public definition in the 1004 context.
This simplified definition is not consistent with Harrison’s old URAR book, p. 42:
“Public means governmentally supplied and regulated. It does not, therefore, include community systems sponsored, owned or operated by the developer or a private company not subject to government regulation or financial assistance. If such systems are found, a description thereof should be given in the Site-Comments section or in the addendum to the report.”
I like my simplified definition and think it more accurately describes the private vs public utility definition in the 1004 context. The simplified definition also avoids a lot of unnecessary confusion when trying to classify utility providers.
Any comments or other interpretations of private vs public utility? Flame away . . .
Muchas gracias.
My original definition of public vs private utility was whether the utility provider was a public entity (such as a city) or a private entity (such as a community water well for a subdevelopment). This led to many interesting and lengthy discussions on whether a utility was public or private based on the utility providers classification. This turns into a gray area very quickly for many utility providers.
Since then, I’ve come to the conclusion this discussion is irrelevant in the 1004 context. My latest interpretation is the 1004 is really asking if the utilities are private to the Subject. The primary information being asked for is whether the Subject’s utilities are contained on site (i.e. private, such as a septic system or water well) or obtained from another source (i.e. public, any outside source is considered public in this context). This is much simpler than my earlier definition and more accurately describes the private vs public definition in the 1004 context.
This simplified definition is not consistent with Harrison’s old URAR book, p. 42:
“Public means governmentally supplied and regulated. It does not, therefore, include community systems sponsored, owned or operated by the developer or a private company not subject to government regulation or financial assistance. If such systems are found, a description thereof should be given in the Site-Comments section or in the addendum to the report.”
I like my simplified definition and think it more accurately describes the private vs public utility definition in the 1004 context. The simplified definition also avoids a lot of unnecessary confusion when trying to classify utility providers.
Any comments or other interpretations of private vs public utility? Flame away . . .
Muchas gracias.
