Submetering vs. Communal Metering (RUBS) in Managing Water Utilities for Multifamily Housing
Published by
Tehama Wireless
on
Efficient water utility management in multifamily housing is increasingly crucial in today's context of heightened sustainability and rising costs. Property owners and managers are exploring methods for water billing, with a focus on two primary methods: individual water metering (submetering) and communal metering (Ratio Utility Billing System, or RUBS).
Submetering: This method involves installing individual water meters for each unit within a property, tracking the exact water usage of each unit. It allows for precise billing based on actual consumption.
Communal Metering (RUBS): RUBS uses a formula-based approach to allocate water costs among residents, factoring in elements like unit size and number of occupants. While simpler, it lacks the accuracy of individual usage tracking.
The following is a detailed comparison of the two methods:
| Aspect | Submetering | RUBS |
|
Initial Costs |
Higher upfront |
Lower initial cost |
|
Investment |
Higher upfront, high ROI potential |
Lower upfront, moderate ROI potential |
|
NOI Impact |
Accurate cost recovery, enhances NOI |
General cost recovery, easier billing process |
|
Efficiency Impact |
Enhances individual usage efficiency |
Streamlines the billing process efficiency |
|
Meter Reading Method |
Individual meter readings, possibly automated |
Allocated based on factors like occupancy, unit size |
|
Administrative Work |
Detailed management, automated systems |
Simpler management |
|
Infrastructure Needs |
Enhances property, requires installation |
No installation, adaptable to existing structures |
|
Maintenance |
Ongoing maintenance but adds infrastructural value |
Minimal maintenance |
|
Compatibility |
May require retrofitting in older buildings |
Universally applicable |
|
Compliance |
Adheres to stringent regional standards |
Must align with local guidelines |
|
Legal Complexity |
Requires adherence to regional regulations |
Subject to local laws and norms |
|
Conservation Impact |
Directly promotes individual conservation |
Encourages general conservation awareness |
|
Property Value |
Adds value with physical infrastructure |
Simplified implementation without infrastructural changes |
|
Tenant Perception |
Viewed positively for fairness and transparency, but may lead to dissatisfaction due to additional billing |
Costs typically incorporated into rent, maintaining consistency but potential for fairness concerns |
Conclusion
This analysis highlights the differences between water submetering and RUBS in multifamily housing. Submetering offers precise billing and individual water conservation incentives but introduces a separate billing system potentially causing tenant dissatisfaction. In contrast, RUBS often includes water costs in rent, providing consistent billing but with potential fairness concerns due to less accuracy. The choice between these systems involves a balance of financial, regulatory, environmental and tenant satisfaction considerations, tailored to each property's unique context.
For property owners and managers considering water submetering systems, Tehama Wireless provides comprehensive solutions and expertise. Contact us to learn more about customizing a submetering system to meet your property's specific needs.