HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/15/1994, 1 - URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN MEETING DATE:
lmlgjju�� I� Clty Of SAn LUIS OBISPO November 15, 1994
�"'�I COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER /
FROM: John Moss, Utilities Director 9m
PREPARED BY: Bill Statler, Finance.Director'l
Gary Henderson, Water Division Manager 4w'
Sue Baasch;Administrative Analyst*
Glen Matteson, Associate Planner
Ron Munds, Water Conservation Coordinator+N-!�
SUBJECT: Urban Water Management Plan
CAO RECOMMENDATION
1. Approve the initial environmental study (ER 25-93) and the negative declaration of
environmental impacts.
2. Adopt a resolution adopting the Urban Water Management Plan and including chapter
two as the Water Element to the General Plan, effective December 15, 1994;
3. Provide direction to staff regarding the alternatives available for protection of the
reliability reserve.
4. Adopt resolution amending water impact fees as set forth in Appendix VII of the Urban
Water Management Plan.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt chapter two of the Urban Water Management Plan to replace the water section of the
Water and Wastewater Element of the General Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION
The Environmental Quality Task Force (EQTF) has provided essentially five recommendations
for Council consideration under separate correspondence dated October 27, 1994.
DISCUSSION
Background
The Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) has been brought before the Council for review
and consideration during three prior meetings on January 11, 1994, March 15, 1994 and July
20, 1994. Based on the public input and direction provided by Council at these meetings, staff
has prepared the final draft of the plan to be considered for adoption. All the noted
modifications to chapter two of the UWMP were reviewed by the Planning Commission at the
September 14, 1994 meeting and public hearing and are recommended for adoption to replace
the existing Water Element to the General Plan. In addition, at the July 20th meeting Council
directed staff to research the alternatives available to ensure that the reliability reserve would not
be used for new development by future Councils.
city of San tins osIspo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Urban Water Management Plan
Page 2
Chapter Two Modifications
The key additions or changes to the water policy chapter since last reviewed by Council are as
follows:
■ Addition of policy 2.1.3.B. regarding groundwater (part of the current Water Element).
■ The water use rate in policy 2.3.2 has been changed to 145 gallons per person per day
as endorsed by the Council at the July 20th meeting. This also changes the overall
projected demand in policy 2.3.3 from 10,350 acre feet per year to 9,096 acre-feet per
year(per Council direction on 7/20/94).
■ Addition of policy 2.6.2 regarding considerations when deciding on the appropriate
sources of supplemental water (part of the current Water Element).
■ Addition of policy 2.6.3 regarding paying for supplemental water for new.development
(part of current Water Element with further clarification on impact fees covering annual
debt service per Council direction of 7/20/94).
■ Additional language added to policy 2.8.2.A. which clarifies when water allocations will
be available from a new water supply source (per Council direction of 7/20/94).
■ Addition of policy 2.8.2.C.which specifies that new development will continue to retrofit
(per Council direction on 7/20/94).
■ Addition of 2.8.3 which states the City will hold in reserve a sufficient amount of water,
including retrofitting, for infill and intensification (per Council direction on 7/20/94).
■ Policy 2.9.1.A. retains the current offset requirement for new development.at the two
to one ratio instead of the initial recommendation of a one to one offset ratio (per
Council direction on 7/20/94).
■ Expanded clarification in policy 2.9.1.B. regarding the use of private wells in a new
development (reflects the language in the current Water Element).
■ Addition of policy 2.11 which states the City will be the only water purveyor within the
City (part of current Water Element).
'111011101pIi10� city of San LUIS OBISPO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Urban Water Management Plan
Page 3
Other Chances
The following are key changes or additions to other chapters of the UWMP:
■ Chapter two will be part of the General Plan as originally proposed and will replace the
water section of the Water and Wastewater Management Element. This change is
reflected in section 1.2 (per Council direction on 7/20/94).
■ The policy which states that replacement of aging water lines at the annual rate of 2%
(formerly policy 2.11) has been moved from chapter two and made part of chapter four's
water operation policies.
■ Chapter three, section 2 which discusses the Nacimiento Project reflects the changes to
the per capita consumption estimates and the handling of annexation areas and the
subsequent revised allocation request of 3,380 acre-feet from the project as recently
approved by Council.
■ Addition of section 5.2 which discusses the basis for establishing impact fees.
■ Addition of Appendix VII which sets forth the analysis for developing recommended
impact fees for water supply and treatment facility improvements attributable to new
development.
Imo' Commission Meeting Summary
At the July 20, 1994 City Council meeting, Council directed staff to initiate the process to
replace the current Water Element, adopted in 1987, with chapter two of the UWMP. On
September 14, 1994 a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission to discuss chapter
two of the UWMP.
There was no public input provided and the commissioners had only a few comments and
questions regarding the document and policies. The commission's main concern was that the
process had been reversed because Council had reviewed and recommended changes to the
document on three occasions prior to coming to the Planning Commission. The commission
voted unanimously (7-0) to approve the recommendation to adopt chapter two of the UWMP as
the updated Water Element with no recommended changes.
►n��111111�p1111111 city of San tins OBISPO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Urban Water Management Plan
Page 4
Environmental Quality Task Force Recommendations
The EQTF has proposed essentially five recommended revisions to the Urban Water
Management Plan. With the exception of the last recommendation, all the issues related to water
policy have been raised and discussed at previous City Council public hearings. The revised
Urban Water Management Plan reflects Council direction given at past meetings.
The last recommendation, in summary, requests that Council add a policy to complete the
environmental impact reports for both the Salinas Reservoir and Water Reuse Projects but hold
them in abeyance without further action until the EIR for the Nacimiento Project is completed
and all three projects can be considered collectively. Staff does not agree with this
recommendation and recommends that it not be included in the Urban Water Management Plan.
Water Impact Fees
Analysis regarding new development water impact fees was presented to Council on July 20,
1994. The purpose of the analysis was to set forth an approach for funding water system
improvements that was consistent with adopted City policy in the General Plan's Land Use
Element, section 1.13.4 and the proposed Urban Water Management Plan, policy number 2.6.3.
The revised fee schedule and analysis are presented in Appendix VII of the UWMP. It is
recommended that the City's water impact fees be initially set at the "mid-range" level ($7,918).
This will provide cost recovery for the debt service requirements of both future water supply
projects and the new water treatment plant attributable to new development. As water supply
projects and related costs become better Imown, fee amounts will be modified as appropriate in
the future.
At the November 1, 1994 meeting, the Council requested that staff respond to concerns raised
by Peoples Self-Help Housing regarding the affect of the proposed impact fees on affordable
housing.
Since water and sewer impact fees were first adopted by the Council in September of 1991, it
has been the City's continuing policy to assess impact fees on all new development including
affordable housing.
There are many factors that determine the price of housing, and because of.this, it is very
difficult to determine the affect of impact fees on affordable housing. For example, there are
many cities with high impact fees that have a large inventory of affordable housing, and
conversely, many cities with low impact fees but little or no affordable housing. However,
production of affordable housing, along with all other developments, requires sufficient water
city of San lues OBIspo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Urban Water Management Plan
Page 5
infrastructure and facilities to support the new development, and that is the purpose of these
proposed fees. Accordingly, in order to achieve the plan policy of assuring that new
development pays its fair share of the cost of new facilities necessary to serve it, and that these
costs are not borne by existing users, staff recommends that the City continue its policy of
assessing impact fees on all new development, including affordable housing projects.
Water Allocation Regulation Chances
Minor modifications to the Water Allocation Regulations will be necessary to remain consistent
with the new policies contained in the UWMP. Staff will return to Council in the near future
with the necessary amendments.
Reliability Reserve
The City Council directed staff to evaluate the alternatives available to ensure that the reliability
reserve would not be used in the future to allow for new development. The reliability reserve
is intended to be used as an insurance for unforeseen situations such as loss of a water supply,
new worst case drought or other emergency situations. This is reflected in the basis for policy
in section 2.4 of the UWMP.
The establishment of the reliability reserve, or a portion thereof, will not occur until a new
supplemental water supply project is accomplished. The Salinas Reservoir and Nacimiento
Projects are the likely sources for establishing the reliability reserve. The time frames for
completion of either of these projects are several years in the future.
Alternatives
There are three alternatives which provide varying degrees of assurance that the reliability
reserve, once it is established, will not be used to allow additional development. The first two
options would be to include language in policy 2.4 requiring either a 5-0 or 4-1 vote of a future
Council to allow modification of the use of the reserve. This alternative may not provide the
level of surety that the current Council is seeking, since it can be modified (ie. 5-0 vote
requirement) by a majority vote of the City Council (3-2) at any time in the future. Although
this can be modified as stated, it would require a public hearing which would provide a forum
to highlight the issue.
The second option would be to amend the City Charter to include a policy relative to the use of
the reliability reserve. This alternative provides a greater level of surety that a future Council
would not unilaterally change the policy.
city of san tins oBispo
Hi;% COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Urban Water Management Plan
Page 6
City Charter Amendment
The Council can place a ballot measure on an upcoming election or hold a special election to
amend the City Charter to include a section on the reliability reserve utilization. There are three
options available: hold a special election, include on March 1996 presidential primary, or include
on November 1996 general election. Each of these options have financial impacts to the City
as outlined below:
Special Election $609000
March 1996 Presidential Flection $20,000
November 1996 General Election $2,000
The reliability reserve will not be established until either the Salinas or Nacimiento Projects are
completed and these projects, at best, will not be completed before 1998. Therefore, staff would
recommend waiting until the November 1996 general election since there is no urgency or need
to expend additional City funds associated with the first two options above.
CONCURRENCES
The Community Development and Finance Departments have reviewed and concur with the
information provided in the Urban Water Management Plan. The Planning Commission, as
stated earlier, concurs with the policies contained in chapter two and is recommending adoption.
FISCAL EWPACT
Adoption of the Urban Water Management Plan does not have any direct fiscal impacts on the
Water Fund at this time. However, as noted in the Council presentation on July 20, 1994 and
set forth in Appendix VII, significant increases in water impact fees will be necessary in
financing the portion of water supply improvements attributable to new development. As
analyzed in Appendix VII, impact fee projections for an "equivalent dwelling unit" range from
$5,243 to 12,568, with a mid-point of$7,245. This compares with the current impact fee for
water supply purposes (exclusive of the treatment plant portion) of$2,416.
Staff recommends that the supply portion of the impact fee be set at the mid-range level
($7,245). Including the treatment plant portion ($673) results in a recommended fee of$7,918
per equivalent dwelling unit. Table F.2 in Appendix VII sets forth the recommended fee
schedule for all residential and non-residential uses and compares them with current fees. In
addition; the plan will ultimately impact user rates for the portion of supply project costs
�"lo
city of San IDIS OBISp0
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Urban Water Management Plan
Page 7
attributable to existing users as more fully discussed in Appendix VII.
Attachments:
1.. Resolution adopting the Urban Water Management Plan and chapter two of the plan as
the revised Water Element to the General Plan,
2. Resolution amending water impact fees.
Distributed Under Separate Cover.
L Urban Water Management Plan
2. Environmental Quality Task Force Recommendations
/-7
RESOLUTION NO. (1994 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL
ADOPTING THE URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
AND REVISING THE GENERAL PLAN
WATER MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
The Council of the City of San Luis Obispo resolves as follows:
1. Record of Proceedings
The City Council has received and considered public testimony and the report and
recommendation of staff and the Planning Commission. The City Council conducted a
public hearing on November 15, 1994 concerning this matter. The minutes of the hearing
indicate Council members' votes on particular components of the plan which may differ
from the vote on this Resolution. Records of these items are on file in the office of the City
Clerk.
2. Public and AgLn—q Review
A draft of the plan has been available for review and comment by interested agencies
and individuals.
3. Environmental Determination
An initial environmental study (ER 25-93 as revised August 12, 1994) has been
prepared and made available for public and agency comment, and the Community
Development. Director has approved a negative declaration, pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act .("CEQA") and State and City CEQA Guidelines. Council
hereby finds that there are no potentially significant impacts and approves the negative
declaration.
4. Revision of Element
The water section of the 1987 General Plan Water & Wastewater Management
Element, as amended,is hereby replaced by Chapter Two of the Urban Water Management
Plan.
S. Adoption of Plan
The Urban Water Management Plan, consisting of a text with tables and figures,
dated September 1994,with changes reflected in the Council minutes of November 15, 1994,
on file in the City Clerk's Office, is hereby adopted.
•
f
Resolution No. Page 2
Adopting Urban Water Management Plan
6. Publication and Availability
The Utilities Director shall cause the newly adopted plan to be published and
provided to City officials,concerned agencies, and public libraries,and to be made available
to the public at a cost not to exceed the cost of reproduction.
7. Effective Date
The newly adopted plan shall be effective on the thirtieth day after passage of this
Resolution.
On motion of . seconded by------. and on the following roll call
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of 1994.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED:
A 4m
RESOLUTION NO. (1994 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
AMENDING WATER IMPACT FEES
WHEREAS, Chapter 4.20.140 of the City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code
establishes water connection fees, hereinafter referred to as impact fees, and provides for the
setting of fee amounts and other matters by resolution of the Council; and
WHEREAS, the Council has adopted an Urban Water Management Plan which
identifies needed improvements to the City's water system; and
WHEREAS, Appendix VII of this plan sets forth a financing strategy for funding these
improvements and includes a comprehensive water impact fee analysis which analyzes the
relationship between new development and the cost of needed water system improvements
(hereinafter referred to as "impact fee analysis").
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo that:
A. FINDINGS
1. The purpose of water impact fees is to protect the public health, safety, and
general welfare by providing adequate water supply, treatment, and distribution facilities to
meet the needs of new development and to mitigate the impacts of new development on the
City's water system.
2. Water impact fees collected pursuant to this resolution shall be used only to pay
for facilities and improvements identified in the impact fee analysis and shall not be in lieu of
any other fee or tax as may be required by this code.
3. There is a reasonable relationship between the types of development on which
the impact fees are imposed and the use of the impact fees and the need for the facilities and
improvements. All new development requires water supply, treatment, and distribution
facilities to protect the public health and safety.
4. There is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the impact fees and the
costs of the facilities and improvements attributable to the development on which the impact
fees are imposed. The estimated costs of facilities and improvements, including financing
costs, to be paid for by water impact fees is shown in the impact fee analysis. Those costs
have been allocated to new development on the basis of dwelling unit type (residential) or
water meter size (non-residential), which is reasonably,related to the water demand generated
by a development project.
Resolution No. (1994 Series)
Page 2
B. COST ESTIMATES
At any time that the actual or estimated costs of facilities identified in the impact fee
analysis changes, the Finance Director shall review the impact fees and determine whether the
change affects the amount of the impact fees. If the impact fees are significantly affected, the
Finance Director shall, within thirty (30) days, recommend to the Council a revised fee for
their consideration.
C. AMOUNT OF IMPACT FEES
Effective February 1, 1995, water impact fees shall be in the amounts set forth in
Exhibit A attached hereto. Unless otherwise acted upon by the Council, the amount of the fees
will automatically be adjusted on July 1, 1995 and on July 1 of each subsequent year by the
annual percentage change in the U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics consumer price index for all
urban consumers (CPI-U), all-cities average for the prior calendar year. Since the facilities and
improvements for which connection fees are charged will be financed through bonds or other
form of debt, the annual adjustments are indexed to consumer prices rather than construction
costs.
D. TIME OF PAYMENT
1. Water impact fees for any development project or portion thereof shall be
payable prior to issuance of building permits required for that development, and shall be
collected by the Building Official. Under Government Code Section 66007(b), the City'is
authorized to collect the fees at the time of building permit issuance because the fees are for
public facilities and improvements for which an account has been established and funds
appropriated, and for which the City has adopted a proposed construction schedule; or the fees
are to reimburse the City for expenditures previously made.
2. For any development project or portion thereof, water impact fees shall be
assessed at the time of application and remain valid for as long as the application is proceeding
through valid processing as per the Uniform Administrative Code.
E. EXEMPTIONS
1. Fire Protection. Upgrading of existing water services and/or meters for the sole
purpose of providing new or improved fire protection facilities shall be exempt from any water
impact fee provided for in this resolution.
2. Landscape Irrigation. Any water services and/or meters installed solely for
landscape irrigation purposes for properties with existing water service shall be exempt from
any water impact fees provided for in this resolution. However, if an increase in water demand
is required, the Utilities Director shall impose a water impact fee.
Resolution No. (1994 Series)
Page 3
F. SEPARATE ACCOUNTS
The Finance Director shall deposit fees collected under this resolution in a separate
water impact fee account as required by Government Code Section 66006. Within sixty (60)
days of the close of each fiscal year, the Finance Director shall make available to the public
an accounting of water impact fee revenues and related expenditures, and the City Council shall
review that information at its next regular public meeting.
On motion of , seconded by
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this day of , 1994.
ATTEST:
Diane Gladwell, City Clerk Mayor Peg Pinard
APPROVED:
G. J rge Attorney
wrRUNUC FEEM
/'/02
City of San Luis Obispo
WATER IMPACT FEES E bit A
Water impact Fee Schedule Effective Febraw 1 1995
Equivalent
Dwelling Water
Units U's m act Fee
Residential
Single family residential 1.0 $7,918
Duplex,townhouse,condominium or apartment 0.8 6,334
Mobile home 0.6 4,751
Non—residential based on meter size
518 or 314 inches 1.0 7,918
1 inch 2.0 15,836
11/2 inches 4.0 31,672
2 inches 6.4 50,675
3 inches 14.0 110,852
4 inches 22.0 174,196
6 inches 45.0 356,310
Residential equimicades are based oa 1990 Census population per household data
Single family residential 2.7
Duplex,townhouse,condominium or apartment 2.2
Mobile home 1.7
URBAN WATER.
MANAGEMENT PLAN
city or '�i�iiii��I��llllllllllll����lllllll
san lois oBispo _ _
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
This Plan was adopted on
San Luis Obispo City Council Resolution No. (1994 Series)..
SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL
Peg Pinard, Mayor
Penny Rappa
Bill Roalman
Dave Romero
Allen Settle
City of San Luis Obispo
Utilities-Department
955 Moho Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
805-781-7215
'c•
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 Purpose and Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Relationship to General Plan and Other Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 Current Water Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
CHAPTER 2. WATER POLICY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.1 Safe Annual Yield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.2 Water Conservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.3 Water Demand Projections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.4 Reliability Reserve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.5 Siltation at Salinas and Whale Rock Reservoirs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
2.6 Supplemental Water Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.7 Multi-Source Water Supply Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2.8 Allocation of New Water Supplies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.9 Water Allocation and Offsets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
2.10 Reclaimed Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
2.11 Water Service Within the City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
CHAPTER 3. SUPPLEMENTAL WATER SUPPLY PROJECTS . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
. 3.1 Salinas Reservoir Expansion Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
3.2 Nacimiento Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
3.3 Water Reuse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
3.4 Water Demand Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
3.5 Other Supplemental Water Supply Project Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
CHAPTER 4. WATER OPERATIONAL PROGRAMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
4.1 Water Treatment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
4.2 Water Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
4.3 Water Customer Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
4.4 Telemetry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
4.5 Water Conservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
CHAPTER 5. FINANCIAL PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
5.1 Annual Water Fund Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
5.2 Impact Fees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
APPENDICES
City of San Luis Obispo i
TABLE OF CONTENTS continued
Figures, Tables, Appendices
FIGURES
Figure 1. Whale Rock Conveyance System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Figure 2. Safe Annual Yield due to Siltation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Figure 3. City's Water Supply and Conveyance System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Figure 4. Pressure Zones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Figure 5. Storage Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Figure 6. Water Transmission Schematic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Figure 7. Water Telemetry System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
TABLES
Table 2.3 Water Use 1980-1993 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Table 2.3.2 Per Capita Water Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Table 2.3.4 Calculation of Present (1994) Water Demand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Table 2.5.1 Salinas Reservoir Capacity Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Table 2.6.1 Required Safe Annual Yield for General Plan Build-Out . . . . . . . . . 22
Table 2.6.2 New Water Supply Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Table 2.8.1 Water to Serve Build-Out (1994 boundaries) and Available for
Annexation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Table 3.1 Salinas Reservoir Expansion Project Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Table 4.5.3 Water Savings through Hardware Retrofit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
APPENDICES
Appendix I Water Policy Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I-1
Appendix H General Plan Land Use Elements-Policies affecting Water Management II-1
Appendix III Water Supply Projects No Longer Being Pursued . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-1
Appendix IV Water Distribution/Customer Service Workload Analysis . . . . . . . . IV-1
Appendix V Water Conservation Programs and Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-1
A. Best Management Practices
B. Current Programs and Services
C. Evaluation of Programs and Technologies
Appendix VI Water Fund Rate Review - September 7, 1993 . . . . . . . . . . . . . VI-1
Appendix VII Impact Fee Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VII-1
11 City of San Luis Obispo
FOREWORD
This Urban Water Management Plan was developed by City of San Luis Obispo Utilities,
Community Development and Finance Departments' staff as a single policy and resource
document. It is intended to consolidate information regarding policies and programs as they
relate to the City's water resources. As a planning document, this Urban Water Management
Plan was intended to provide the basis upon which the Utilities Department would pursue
development of water resources, programs and services. As the City progresses with the various
projects and programs identified in this document, it will be necessary to review and modify this
document, especially as it relates to the policies established herein.
The Urban Water Management Plan is structured to serve as an easily-understood water policy
and resource guide. Following the introduction, the major policies are stated, followed by a
description and analysis of the projects, programs and financial considerations necessary to
support those policies and the goals of the City's General Plan. The chapter on policies,
Chapter 2, is structured to first identify the policy and its relation to other policies contained in
the plan, then to provide the "basis" of that policy or the rationale used in maldng the policy
decision. This format creates a document where the substantive policy information is readily
retrievable without having to search the text for the actual policy statement. Chapter 2 serves
as the Water Element to the General Plan.
The policies and information contained in this Urban Water Management Plan provide the
necessary policy support for the water-related ordinances and regulations contained in the
Municipal Code (Titles 4, 13 and 17).
Planning for the development and wise use of our water resources is of paramount importance
to the City of San Luis Obispo. This Urban Water Management Plan and the policies contained
herein will provide the foundation for responsible water resource planning.
City of San Luis Obispo iii
ry City of San Luis Obispo
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
This summary describes the purpose, water policies, operations, and a basis for financial
analysis of the Urban Water Management Plan (Plan). The goal of the summary is to provide
a clear, concise overview of the water planning and management decisions facing the City of San
Luis Obispo.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
The purposes of the Plan are to assist in formulating long range City water policy, determine
needed improvements in the water supply and distribution systems, identify needed expansion
to reach General Plan goals, and develop a financial plan for achieving the recommendations
presented in this document.
The specific objectives of the Plan can be summarized as follows:
■ Provide estimates of future supplemental water requirements based the Land Use
planning Element and per capita use figures.
■ Provide an evaluation of alternative supply sources that could meet supplemental
water requirements.
■ Summarize water treatment processes and regulations, and identify the water treatment,
distribution and storage systems current deficiencies and future needs.
■ Consolidate previous water policy,
■ Evaluate the Water Conservation Program.
■ Comply with State Law, AB 797, the Urban Water Management Planning Act.
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN SUMMARY
This Executive Summary condenses the Plan into the following six main areas:
1.2 The Plan's Relationship to the General Plan
1.3 Current Water Supply Sources
2. Water Policy
3. Supplemental Water Supply Projects
4. Water Operational Programs
5. Financial Plan
City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Plan- .;xecutive Summary
1.2 THE PLAN'S RELATIONSHIP TO THE GENERAL PLAN AND OTHER
DOCUMENTS
Chapter 2 of this Plan replaces the Water section of the General Plan's Water and Wastewater
Management Element, adopted in 1987. This plan includes all information needed to comply
with state law AB 797, the Urban Water Management Planning Act.
Implementation progress of this plan will be presented to the Council on yearly basis as part of
the Annual Water Operational Plan.
1.3 CURRENT WATER SUPPLY SOURCES
The City of San Luis Obispo currently receives water from three sources, Salinas Reservoir,
Whale Rock Reservoir, and local groundwater. The City has depended on imported supplies
from Salinas Reservoir, located near the community of Santa Margarita, since 1944 and Whale
Rock Reservoir, located near the community of Cayucos, since 1964. With the onset of the
drought in 1986, resulting in decreasing surface water supplies, the City activated its
groundwater sources in 1989.
2.0 WATER POLICY
The following policy statements and basis for policy summaries provide the foundation for
delivering an adequate supply of water to meet current and projected demands for the City of
San Luis Obispo.
2.1 SAFE ANNUAL YIELD
Policy
2.1.1 Basis for Planning
The City will plan for future development and for water supplies based on the amount of water
which can be supplied each year, under critical drought conditions. This amount, called "safe
annual yield", will be adopted by the City Council. The safe annual yield determination will
be revised as significant new information becomes available, and as water sources are gained
or lost. The determination will consider a staff analysis, which will recommend an amount
based on coordinated use of all water sources. Each change to safe annual yield will be
reflected in an amendment of this plan.
2.1.2 Safe Yield Amount
The City's safe annual yield of potable water is 7,735 acre feet, based on 7,235 acre feet from
the coordinated operation of Salinas Reservoir and Whale Rock Reservoir, and 500 acre feet of
groundwater.
Vi City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Plan- executive Summary
2.1.3 Groundwater
A. The amount of groundwater which the City will rely upon towards safe annual yield is
identified in. Section 2.1.2. The City will maximize the use of groundwater in
conjunction with other available water supplies to maximize the yield and long term
reliability of all water resources and to minimize overall costs for meeting urban water
demands. The City shall monitor water levels at the well sites to determine whether
reduction or cessation of pumping is appropriate when water levels approach historic low
levels.
B. The City will not compete with local agricultural use of groundwater outside the urban
reserve line or damage wildlife habitat through reduced natural stream flows in obtaining
long-term sources of water supply.
Basis for Policy Summary
The safe annual yield of a reservoir depends on rainfall, the resulting runoff, evaporation, and
releases for purposes other than the supply in question (such as required releases for downstream
uses). The estimation of safe annual yield is based on historical hydrological data. The City
has developed a mathematical computer model of the Salinas and Whale Rock Reservoirs, which
accounts for all the factors that result in a safe yield amount. The current safe annual yield
amount results from using data from .1943 through 1991. This period includes the drought
periods of 1946-51, 1959-61, 1976-77, and 1986-91.
The current calculation reflects taking advantage of differences between the reservoirs through
coordinated operation which means the City uses Salinas first, since it gains and loses water
faster than Whale Rock, which is used as a backup source. The safe annual yield of 7,735 acre
feet was adopted by the City Council as part of the 1992/93 Water Operational Plan.
2.2 WATER CONSERVATION
Policy
2.2.1 Long-term Water Efficiency
The City will implement water efficiency programs which will maintain long-term, per-capita
usage at or below the per capita use rate as identified in Section 2.3.2.
2.2.2 Short-term Water Shortages
Short-term mandatory measures, in addition to the long-term programs, will be implemented
when the City's water supplies are projected to last three years or less, based on projected water
consumption, coordinated use of all City water supplies sources, and considering the drought
pattern on which safe yield is based (or response to other situations which may interrupt supply).
City of San Luis Obispo vii
Urban Water Management Plan- rxecutive Summary
Basis for Policy SummaJr
Water conservation was first referenced as a part of the City's water management policy in the
1973 General Plan. In 1985, the City adopted the Annual Water Operational Plan policy which
established water conservation as a means to extend water supplies during projected water
shortages. During this time, many technological and philosophical changes have occurred which
are proving water conservation to be both a short term corrective measure for immediate water
supply shortages and a long term solution to water supply reliability.
2.3 WATER DEMAND PROJECTIONS
Pokcv
2.3.1 Basis of Projections
The City will project water requirements, considering long-term conditions and the full range
of water uses in the City. Separate projections of potable and nonpotable requirements will be
made.
2.3.2 Water Use Rate
The City shall use 145 gallons per person per day (approximately 0.162 acre-feet per person per
year) and the number of City residents to plan total projected future water demand. This
quantity will be revised if warranted by long-term water use trends, including differences in the
relationship between residential and nonresidential usage. (Throughout this Plan, 145 gallons
per person per day is used in computations of future water demand.)
2.3.3 Overall Projected Water Demand
Applying 145 gallons per person per day to a projected City resident population of about 56,000
at General Plan build-out results in a projected water demand of 9,096 acre-feet per year,
(excluding demand from the Cal Poly campus, which has separate entitlements).
2.3.4 Present Water Demand
Present water demand shall be calculated by multiplying the water use rate identified in Section
2.3.2 by the current city population (as determined by the California Department of Finance,
Population Research Unit).
Basis for Policy Samm_M
The City must know how much water will be needed to serve residents, businesses, and other
users which could be accommodated by the General Plan. This quantity can be projected using
different methods. All methods involve assumptions about both future usage rates and the
numbers and types of users expected in the future. The quantity expressed in the policy above
Viii City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Plan - . xecutive Summary
corresponds closely with both (1) total citywide usage compared with total resident population
and (2) projections of water demand based on usage by various land use categories.
2.4 RELIABILITY RESERVE
Ponce
In seeking and accounting for new water supplies, the City will strive for a "reliability reserve"
of 2,000 acre feet of safe annual yield (about 20 percent of projected water demand at full build-
out).
Basis for Policy Summary
The Council supported the reliability reserve concept in March 1993, by amending the Water
and Wastewater Management Element to include it. The reserve will help maintain adequate
water supplies during unpredictable changes, such as a new worst case drought, loss of a water
source, contamination of a water source, or failure of a new source to provide projected yield,
and not to allow additional development.
2.5 SILTATION AT SALINAS AND WHALE ROCK RESERVOIRS
Policy
The City shall develop 500 acre-feet of safe annual yield to account for the loss of water storage
due to siltation at Whale Rock and Salinas Reservoirs to the year 2025.
Basis for Po Z Summar+
Siltation at reservoirs is a natural occurrence which can substantially reduce the storage capacity
over long periods. The reduction of available storage will reduce the safe annual yield of the
reservoir. Siltation at reservoirs varies depending on factors such as rainfall intensity, and
watershed management practices. There have been numerous reports addressing siltation at
Salinas Reservoir, but no studies have been done for Whale Rock Reservoir.
During the recent drought, water at Salinas Reservoir fell to a record low level. An aerial
survey of the reservoir was prepared in order to update storage capacity information. The latest
information indicates that the siltation rate is on the order of 40 acre-feet per year.
Since no information is available to indicate what rate of siltation is occurring at the Whale Rock
reservoir, it is assumed for planning purposes that the annual average rate of siltation is similar
to Salinas Reservoir.
City of San Luis Obispo ix
Urban Water Management Plan _xecutive Summary
2.6 SUPPLEMENTAL WATER REQUIREMENTS
&Aa
2.6.1 Supplemental Water Requirement
The City shall develop additional water supplies to meet the projected demand at build-out of
the City's General Plan, to establish the reliability reserve, and to offset water yields lost due
to siltation. The supplemental water supply amount shall be based on the adopted per capita
water use figure identified for planning purposes in Section 2.3.
2.6.2 Supplemental Water Sources
In deciding on appropriate sources of supplemental water, the City will evaluate impacts on other
users of the water and other environmental impacts, total and unit costs, reliability, water
quality, development time, and quantity available.
2.6.3 Paying for Supplemental Water for New Development
The cost for developing new water supplies necessary for new development will be paid by
impact fees set at a rate sufficient to cover the annual debt service cost of the new water supplies
attributable to new development.
Basis for Policy SummaEy
Based on the draft Land Use Element endorsed by the City Council in February 1992 and the
per capita use rate, the projected total amount of water for the City to serve General Plan build-
out is 11,596 acre feet. This figure includes the 2,000 acre feet reliability reserve and
accounting for siltation at the reservoirs.
2.7 MULTI-SOURCE WATER SUPPLY
Policy
The City shall continue to develop and use water resources projects to maintain multi-source
water supplies, and in this manner, reduce reliance on any one source of water supply and
increase its supply options in future droughts or other water supply emergencies.
Basis for Poka Summary
Having several sources of water can avoid dependence on one source that would not be available
during a drought or other water supply reduction. The Council has supported having multiple
sources since adopting the General Plan Water Management Element in 1987 and by endorsing
the above policy statement in November 1990.
x City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Plan- .:xecutive Summary
2.8 ALLOCATION OF NEW SUPPLIES
Pokcy
2.8.1 Balancing Safe Annual Yield and Overall Demand
When new water sources are obtained, the additional safe annual yield shall be allocated first
to eliminate any deficit between safe annual yield (Section 2.1) and present demand as defined
in Sections 2.1 and 2.3.4 at the time the new source is obtained.
2.8.2 Supplying New Development
A. The City will make available to new development only that amount of safe yield which
exceeds present water use (Section 2.3.4). Available allocations will be assigned to
development in a way that supports balanced growth, consistent with the General Plan.
Allocations from a new water supply project shall be considered available at the time
project construction is initiated.
B. Any additional safe annual yield beyond that needed to balance safe annual yield and
present demand will be allocated (A) one-half to the reliability reserve and compensating
for reduced yields due to siltation and (B) one-half to development, subject to the
requirements in Section 2.8.3, "Reserve for Intensification and Infill".
C. Until all toilet and showerhead fixtures in the City are replaced with low flow toilet and
showerhead fixtures, the amount by which safe annual yield (Section 2.1.2) exceeds
present demand resulting from the assumption that 100% of the retrofit is complete
(Section 2.3.4), shall not be made available to development.
2.8.3 Reserve for Intensification and Infill Development
A sufficient amount of water supply, including the potential water savings from replacing water
fixtures in the City (Section 2.9.1), will be held in reserve to serve intensification and infill
within existing City limits as of July 1994.
2.8.4 Accounting for Reclaimed Water
Reclaimed water shall be accounted for as a "non-potable" supply as identified under
Section 2.10.3. Use of reclaimed water shall not be considered as a component of the
City's safe annual yield, but may reduce demand for potable water supplies as reclaimed
water use increases.
2.8.5 Private Water Supplies
When developments are supplied by private groundwater wells, the yield of those wells will not
be counted toward the City's safe annual yield. Such yield, however, will result in the demand
City of San Luis Obispo xi
Urban Water Management Plan _aecutive Summary
for City water supply being lower than it otherwise would be, which may necessitate adjustments
of the per capita water usage figure used to estimate overall demand.
Basis for Pokey Summarx
The City is pursuing additional water supply projects. The City must address how the added
yield from these projects will be allocated, since the yield added at any one time may not supply
all potential uses. The City has identified the following potential uses for the new supplies:
■ Eliminating the deficit between adopted planning water usage figures and safe yield;
■ Compensating for reduced yields due to reservoir siltation;
■ Establishing a reliability reserve;
■ Providing for development of more dwellings, businesses, and public facilities.
The policies objectives are to balance the needs of all the areas identified while not compounding
the potential water shortage problems for existing residents of the City.
2.9 WATER ALLOCATION AND OFFSETS
Policy
2.9.1 Exemptions for Offsets
A. When there is no safe yield to allocate to a project, that project may be built if the
developer makes changes in facilities served by the City, which will reduce long-term
water usage equal to twice the allocation required for the project, consistent with the
policies in Section 2.8.
B. The City may exempt a project from needing an allocation or an offset, or it may reduce
the amount of the required allocation or offset, to the extent that the project is supplied
by a private well which will not significantly affect the yield of City wells. Such a well
may be operated by the owner of the property containing the well only for the owner's
use. The City will consider the cumulative effects of wells in the groundwater basin in
making this decision. Such wells may be used only when:
1. The City Council approves the well proposal as part of a specific land
development project approval, and the proposed well system meets all City standards;
and
2. A qualified, independent, hydrological investigation demonstrates that the well(s)
reliably can provide sufficient quality and quantity of water for the proposed land
development project and will not impact the yields from City wells.
xv City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Plan - .:xecutive Summary
2.9.2 Basis for Allocations and Offsets
Required allocations and offsets will be based on long-term usage for each type of development.
(These use and offset factors will be determined and published by the City, and may be revised,
as warranted by new information.)
Basis for Pokey Summary
In 1988, the City began to formally account for long-term water usage in new development. As
a result of the 1986-1991 drought, the City decided that there should be no new development
that would increase water use unless safe yield and present use would be balanced. Nearly all
construction since 1990 has been replacement buildings, remodels, or projects which retrofitted
facilities to save (offset) twice the amount of water or water allocation necessary to serve the
project.
2.10 RECLAIMED WATER
Ponce
2.10.1 Reclaimed Water Quality
The City will produce high quality reclaimed water, suitable for a wide range of non-potable
uses.
2.10.2 Uses of Reclaimed Water
The City will make available reclaimed water to substitute for existing potable water uses as
allowed by law and to supply new non-potable uses.
2.10.3 Accounting for Reclaimed Water
As reclaimed water supplies new development or substitutes for potable water in existing
development, reliable yield of nonpotable water will be increased. Reclaimed water will be
credited to nonpotable reliable yield not when it is potentially available at the treatment plant,
but when it is actually available to a user due to completion of the necessary distribution
facilities.
2.10.4 City Reclaimed Water Projects
When the City provides distribution facilities that allow substitution of reclaimed water for
potable water, the resulting reduction in potable water demand will be given offset credit for
government projects (including new City parks or buildings), under any policies or rules limiting
the amount of water which can be allocated to development projects.
City of San Luis Obispo xiii
Urban Water Management Plan- ..aerutive Summary
2.10.5 Private Reclaimed Water Projects
A. When a developer of a private project provides distribution facilities that allow
the substitution of reclaimed water in facilities that have used potable City water,
the resulting reduction in potable water usage will be credited to any allocation
of potable water needed for the developer's project, at a two-to-one ratio, similar
to the offset credit.
B. When a developer of a private project provides distribution facilities that allow
use of reclaimed water in that project, any required potable water allocation for
that project shall be reduced by a corresponding amount.
2.10.6 Combined Reclaimed Water Projects
When a component of the reclaimed water distribution system is funded in part by the City and
in part by a private developer, the credit for reduction in potable water usage resulting from that
component shall be divided in a proportionate share between the City and the developer based
on the respective contribution to the component.
Basis for Policy Summary
Reclaimed water is highly treated wastewater (sewage) which can be used for many nonpotable
uses such as landscape irrigation, industrial processes, and toilet flushing in certain types of
buildings. Use of reclaimed water will require a separate distribution system from potable water
lines.
Reclaimed water can be used to supply nonpotable uses in new development and to offset potable
uses in existing development. These potential uses require a deliberate method to account for
reclaimed water use, consistent with policies concerning total water requirements and other water
sources.
2.11 WATER SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY
Policy
The City will be the only purveyor of water within the City.
Basis for Policy Summary
Historically, the City has been the sole water purveyor within the City limits. This allowed the
City to maintain uniformity of water service and distribution standards, and to be consistent in
developing and implementing water policy. In continuing to be the sole water purveyor, the
City will maintain control over water quality, distribution and customer service, as well as
ensure consistency with the City's General Plan policies and goals.
xiv City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Plan - .xecutive Summary
3.0 SUPPLEMENTAL WATER SUPPLY PROJECTS
Po
The City shall pursue the expansion of the Salinas Reservoir, the Nacimiento Reservoir Project,
water reuse, and water demand management activities as supplemental water supply sources to
meet current and projected water demand.
Introduction
The City has been pursuing several water supply options over the past several years to secure
adequate supplies to meet current and projected future demand. The following section discusses
the projects presently being considered by the City.
3.1 SALINAS RESERVOIR EXPANSION PROJECT
The Salinas Dam was constructed by the War Department in 1941 to provide water to Camp San
Luis Obispo and the City of San Luis Obispo. The original construction plans for the dam
included the installation of an operable spillway gate to provide an estimated storage capacity
of approximately 45,000 acre-feet. A small fracture was discovered beneath the dam during
construction. Therefore, the gates were not installed because of stability concerns.
An 1989 study revealed that the dam (following the installation of the gates) was strong enough
to withstand a major earthquake without failing or causing a sudden release of water. The
analysis also found that raising the dam 19 feet would produce an additional 1,650 acre-feet a
year of safe annual yield from the reservoir.
Before the project proceeds, two hurdles must be crossed: certifying the environmental impact
report, and resolving the ownership issue of the reservoir facilities. The City Council has
supported the ownership transfer to the County of San Luis Obispo and has been working to
develop an agreement acceptable to both parties.
3.2 NACIAHENTO RESERVOIR PROJECT
The Nacimiento Reservoir provides flood protection and is a source of supply for groundwater
recharge for the Salinas Valley. It is owned and operated by the Monterey County Flood
Control and Water Conservation District. The San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and
Water Conservation District (District) has an entitlement of 17,500 acre-feet per year of water
from the reservoir.
The preliminary feasibility study has been divided into three phases and District has requested
that agencies interested in future participation share the costs associated with the studies. Phase
I of the study evaluated the reliability of the reservoir to deliver water at a maximum amount
of 17,500 acre-feet per year and was completed in December 1992. The purpose of Phase II
is to evaluate and recommend equitable apportionment of the District's entitlement to interested
agencies, to analyze and determine the best pipeline alignment, to determine facility
City of San Luis Obispo xv
Urban Water Management Plan - ._.,ecutive Summary
requirements, estimate costs, and to determine probable environmental impacts and mitigation
measures. The reports were completed in December 1993. Phase III work includes the report
and recommendations.
3.3 WATER REUSE
Reuse of the highly treated water produced by the City's Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) is
a drought resistant portion of the City's multi-source water plan. The WRF produces
approximately 4,000 acre-feet of disinfected tertiary treated reclaimed water per year. This
water is suitable for most uses other than drinldng and food preparation.
Since most of the recycled water will be used for irrigation, it is estimated that only 1,830 of
the remaining 3,280 acre-feet will actually be useable. This is because demand for irrigation
water is very limited during the winter while discharge from the WRF is fairly constant. The
City does not plan to construct a seasonal storage facility at this time.
The Water Reuse Project will construct a distribution system to deliver reclaimed water to large
volume customers throughout San Luis Obispo. The system will be designed for future
expansion to serve small volume users, when it becomes economically feasible to do so. The
City's Wastewater Division will operate the WRF and the water reuse pumps and filters located
at the treatment Facility. The City's Water Division will operate and maintain the water reuse
distribution system. The tentative completion date of the project is June 1996.
3.4 WATER DEMAND MANAGEMENT
Water demand management practices and technology have advanced significantly in the last
several years in reaction to the drought of 1986-1991. Historically, water demand management
was viewed as an emergency response to extreme water shortage situations. The importance of
using our water resources wisely and efficiently is imperative to assure adequate, reliable water
supplies in the future.
In September 1991, the City Council approved and authorized the Mayor to sign the
"Memorandum of Understanding" (MOU) regarding• urban water conservation and the
implementation of the "Best Management Practices" (BMP's). This signifies a minimum ten
year commitment to implement and evaluate the water efficiency measures presented in the
MOU. Using the BMP's as a road map for future water demand management program
implementation, a balanced program of providing information and assistance to the City's water
customers is necessary to maintain the water use levels required to "stabilize the City's water
supplies."
3.5 OTHER SUPPLEMENTAL WATER SUPPLY ALTERNATIVES
3.5.1 Desalination
In May 1990, the City began a feasibility study for a short-term desalination facility. The
preliminary analysis concluded that 3,000 acre feet per year of water could be provided at an
xvi City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Plan -.;xecutive Summary
estimated cost of 19.5 million dollars. The "Miracle March" rains of 1991 provided adequate
runoff and storage in the City's reservoirs to allow the termination of the desalination project
on April 16, 1991.
Desalination may be a water supply consideration in the future if other water supply projects
currently under review are not accomplished. Though considered an expensive source of water
at this time, advances in technology in the future may reduce the costs to a more acceptable
level.
3.5.2 Cloud Seeding
The City activated a three year cloud seeding program in January 1991 in response to the
drought. The program targeted the Salinas and Lopez reservoirs watersheds, and the County
of San Luis Obispo paid a prorata share of the total cost of the program.
Salinas Reservoir's watershed runoff characteristics are favorable for producing significant runoff
during average rain seasons. Therefore, cloud seeding is not viewed as an annual program but
as a program that the Council may approve following below normal rainfall years.
3.5.3 Salinas to Whale Rock Transfer
The idea of transferring water which would otherwise spill downstream from Salinas Reservoir
to Whale Rock Reservoir was evaluated by staff and presented to Council in 1993. The analysis
revealed numerous obstacles and limitations, and Council directed staff not to proceed at this
time with further studies relative to this project.
3.5.4 Groundwater Recharge
Groundwater recharge using tertiary treated reclaimed water may be future water supply
alternative. Because of the capacity and recharge capabilities, there may be limited opportunities
for recharging the groundwater basin. The State Department of Health Services have very
stringent regulations governing such non-potable water recharge projects. An extensive analysis
and study evaluating costs, water recharge potential, and-potential storage or injection sites will
be required before pursuing such a project.
4.0 WATER OPERATIONAL PROGRAMS
PON
The City shall sustain city-wide water efficiency programs and provide an adequate supply of
high quality water which
■ Meets all Federal and State standards;
■ Provides uninterrupted water flow at sufficient pressures;
■ Provides fire protection.
City of San Luis Obispo xvii
Urban Water Management Plan ._xecutive Summary
The City shall allocate funding to meet the goals and objectives presented in this chapter (also
see Chapter 5). The City should strive to replace aging water lines at the annual rate of 2% of
the replacement value of the water distribution system.
Introduction
This section will describe the existing water system, operation and maintenance procedures, and
identify current and future system deficiencies.
4.1 WATER TREATMENT
Over the past twenty years, surface water treatment and groundwater treatment standards and
regulations have become more stringent. With the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act
(SDWA) in 1974, Congress authorized the federal government to establish national drinking
water regulations. Since that time, many amendments have been made to the act which require
additional monitoring and treatment and thereby increased operational costs.
For the City, the most significant issue is the regulation aimed at reducing the formation of
disinfection by-products, specifically trihalomethanes (THM's). To remain within the acceptable
level of THM's, meet anticipated future surface water quality standards, and increase water
treatment operational efficiency, the City is upgrading the water treatment facility to use ozone
as the primary disinfectant instead of chlorine.
In November 1992, nitrate levels in the Auto Park Way well exceeded State standards, so that
well was taken off-line. The City's Denny's well experienced a similar increase in nitrate levels
and was taken off-line in June 1993. Treatment alternatives for nitrate removal will be
recommended to Council during 1994.
4.2 WATER DISTRIBUTION
The water distribution program delivers potable water from the water treatment plant and wells
to customers and fire hydrants via three storage reservoirs, six pump stations, eight water tanks,
and approximately 300 miles of water mains. Some pipes are over 100 years old, and many are
too small to meet current fire-flow requirements. The City has not funded distribution system
replacement sufficiently to ensure replacement prior to reaching the end of the infrastructure's
service life. Because of this, the current water distribution staff workload is limited mainly to
corrective maintenance with minimal time for preventative maintenance.
In order to improve the reliability of the water distribution system, a comprehensive preventative
maintenance program should be established. A workload analysis indicates that a minimum of
two additional staff will be required to implement a cost effective preventative maintenance
program.
xviii City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Plan - ciecutive Summary
4.3 WATER CUSTOMER SERVICE
The Water Customer Service Program is responsible for accurately measuring water delivered
through the distribution system to the City's 12,500 customers. Other duties include the repair
of meter leaks, meter replacement and testing, and the starting and discontinuance of service.
The current program needs are being met with assistance from the water distribution crew during
peak workload periods. Future growth will add a significant number of water meters which may
require additional staffing. As areas are annexed, an analysis of staffing impacts will be
performed and recommendations presented to Council.
4.4 TELEMETRY
Telemetry literally means "measuring at a distance". Telemetry became part of the Utilities'
operations in 1988 when the Regional Water Quality Control Board required installation of
alarms on the City wastewater collection lift stations. It has evolved into complex computer
network, monitoring the City's water and wastewater systems. When completed, the telemetry
system will save staff time by allowing the monitoring and system adjustments to be made from
a central location, add reliability to the water system, and insure the City is in compliance with
federal and state regulations.
4.5 WATER CONSERVATION
In June 1985, the Council adopted the Annual Water Operational Policy which established a
procedure to monitor the City's water supply situation. An integral component of the policy was
the establishment of a water demand program aimed at instituting preventative measures when
water supply deficits are projected.
Water conservation has two primary components, short-term and long-term water demand
management. Short-term activities address immediate water shortage situations caused by
prolonged below normal rainfall or disruption in water service due to natural disaster such as
an earthquake. Due to the drought and water shortages experienced from 1989 to 1992, the
short-term measures developed during that period (formalized in the City's Water Shortage
Contingency Plan) will be a model for any future water emergencies the City might face.
Long-term programs make permanent reductions in water demand while minimally impacting
customer's lifestyles. In September 1991, The City approved and signed the "Memorandum of
Understanding" (MOU) regarding urban water conservation and the implementation of the "Best
Management Practices". (BMP's). The BMP's act as a road map for the City's long-term water
conservation program.
5.0 FINANCIAL PLAN
Policy
The City's policy is to fully recover all water costs, operations, maintenance, capital, debt
service, and appropriate overhead, through water revenues. Resolution No. 6447 states the
City of San Luis Obispo xix
Urban Water Management Plan- .xecutive Summary
primary goals of the City's water utility are to provide quality water service to its citizens and
to function as a self-sufficient enterprise. Under the policy, all water revenues are used only
for water purposes. The water fund will reimburse the general fund for all indirect costs
pursuant to the approved cost allocation plan.
Water impact fees were established in 1991 to pay for needed facilities and improvements
reasonably related to new development within the City. These fees are adjusted annually to
account for changes in the cost of construction or other considerations which affect the
reasonable relationship between the fees and the cost of facilities and improvements on which
the fees are based.
xx City of San Luis Obispo
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The City of San Luis Obispo has aggressively monitored and managed its water resources during
the past decade. Faced with increasingly restrictive budgets, growing population, limited
resources, and the commitment to serving our customers needs, the City has fostered a
management style which is pro-active rather than reactive, with an emphasis on actions which
achieve practical results. This philosophy is the foundation for the Utilities Department's
development of the Urban Water Management Plan.
To evaluate the current water supply and delivery systems and to plan for needed expansion and
improvements through the year 2025, the City has undertaken the preparation of this document.
The purposes of the plan are to formulate long range City water policy, identify needed
improvements both in the water supply and distribution systems, determine needed expansion
to reach the General Plan goals, and develop a basis for financial planning to achieve the
recommendations made in this document.
Objectives and Scope
The specific objectives of the Urban Water Management Plan can be summarized as follows:
■ Provide estimates of future supplemental water requirements based on population
projections developed from the General Plan Land Use Element and per capita water use
figures.
■ Provide an evaluation of alternative water supply sources, both short and long term, that
could meet supplemental water requirements. Evaluations shall be based on economic,
technical, and environmental factors.
■ Summarize the water treatment processes and regulations, and identify the water treatment,
distribution and storage systems current deficiencies and future needs.
■ Consolidate previously-adopted water policy.
■ Evaluate the water conservation program.
■ Comply with state law, AB 797, the Urban Water Management Planning Act.
City of San Luis Obispo t
Urban Water Management Pld,
The Urban Water Management Plan for the City of San Luis Obispo will provide a policy and
strategy for adequately developing the City's water resources and its treatment and delivery
systems. It will also bring the City into compliance with the requirements of state law (AB 797)
relating to water conservation. The Plan will clearly define and analyze the key water issues
facing the City and then identify solutions to meet our supply and infrastructure needs. It will
also evaluate financial options and address institutional relationships as necessary. The Plan is
consistent with the goals, policies, land use, and population projections presented in the 1994
Planning Commission draft Land Use Element.
2 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Plan
1.2 RELATIONSHIP TO GENERAL PLAN AND OTHER DOCUMENTS
Chapter 2, Water Policies, constitutes the Water Element of the General Plan, and replaces the
water section of the Water and Wastewater Management Element.
This plan includes all information needed to comply with State law AB 797, the Urban Water
Management Planning Act and will be updated in the year 2000, in accordance with provisions
of AB 797.
Progress on the implementation of this plan will be presented to the City Council on a yearly
basis as part of the Annual Water Operational Plan.
City of San Luis Obispo 3
Urban Water Management Plm,
1.3 CURRENT WATER SOURCES
1.3.1 SALINAS RESERVOIR
Introduction
The Salinas Reservoir (also known as Santa Margarita Lake) is located on the upper Salinas
River, approximately nine miles southeast of the community of Santa Margarita. The project
was originally built by the U.S. Army to ensure an adequate water supply for Camp San Luis
Obispo. The dam and appurtenances were declared surplus by the War Department on April
147 1947 and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers assumed responsibility for the facilities. On
July 11, 1947, the Corps entered into an agreement with the San Luis Obispo County Flood
Control and Water Conservation District (District) for the operation and maintenance of the dam
and related facilities. The City has an agreement with the Corps for the water from the
reservoir. As part of this agreement, the City pays to the District all operation and maintenance
costs associated with the water delivery and storage facilities.
Operation and Distribution
Salinas Reservoir is formed by a concrete arched dam. Immediately following construction, the
reservoir had an estimated storage capacity of 26,000 acre-feet, surface area of 793 acres, and
a drainage area of 112 square miles. As a result of siltation the reservoir capacity has been
reduced. This is discussed in more detail in Section 2.5.
Water is conveyed from Salinas Reservoir through 48,700 feet (9.2 miles) of 24-inch diameter
reinforced concrete pipe to a 3,000,000 gallon regulating reservoir at Santa Margarita booster
pumping station. The pipeline is designed to flow by gravity from the reservoir when the
reservoir surface level is above the elevation of 1,267 feet. A booster pump station at the base
of the dam, consisting of two horizontal centrifugal pumps, is capable of maintaining the rated
flow of 12 cubic feet per second (cfs) when the water surface elevation falls below 1,267 feet.
Three electrically driven horizontal centrifugal pumps at the Santa Margarita booster station
pump water through 6,810 feet of 24-inch diameter reinforced concrete pipe to the entrance
portal of the Cuesta Tunnel, which runs 5,327 feet through the mountains near Cuesta Grade.
From the outlet portal of the tunnel, water is conveyed through an 18-inch diameter steel
pipeline a distance of 5,133 feet to the City's turnout point. From the turnout, an 18-inch
diameter pipe runs 4,180 feet to the Stenner Creek hydroelectric plant. From there, a pipeline
that varies from 24-inches to 30-inches in diameter conveys the water by gravity to the water
treatment plant 5,930 feet downstream.
Operation and Maintenance Evaluation
The operation and maintenance of the dam and water conveyance system are the responsibility
of San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. The City currently
pays all operating and capital costs associated with the reservoir and transmission system
(excluding any recreational activities).
4 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Plan
Recommendations for System Improvements
The City proposes to install a gate on the spillway in the Salinas Dam, effectively raising the
high water surface of the reservoir by approximately 19 feet. When completed, the expansion
of storage capacity from approximately 23,843 acre-feet to 41,790 acre-feet will increase the
safe annual yield of the reservoir by an estimated 1,650 acre-feet.
1.3.2 WHALE ROCK RESERVOIR
Introduction
Whale Rock reservoir is located on Old Creek approximately one half mile east of the
community of Cayucos. The project was planned, designed, and constructed under the
supervision of the State Department of Water Resources. Construction took place between
October 1958 and April 1961. The reservoir is jointly owned by the City of San Luis Obispo,
the California Men's Colony, and the California Polytechnic State University at San Luis
Obispo. These three agencies form the Whale Rock Commission which is responsible for
operational policy and administration of the reservoir. Day-to-day operation is provided by the
City of San Luis Obispo.
Operation
Whale Rock reservoir is formed by an earthen dam and can store an estimated 40,662 acre-feet
of water. The project facilities consist of a 30-inch pipeline, two pumping stations, a
hydroelectric generator, 2.1 miles of trails and a fishing access facility, maintenance facility and
offices, a structure previously used as a private residence, and percolation ponds.
City staff are responsible for ongoing maintenance and operation of the reservoir, including the
inlet and outlet structures, reservoir structural instrumentation, access roads, daily reservoir level
readings and climatological data, percolation pond, reservoir patrol and security, hydroelectric
power generation, pipeline pumps and pumping stations, water meters, cathodic protection
system, and other associated duties. In addition, staff operates a seasonal steelhead hatchery at
the reservoir which started operation during the 1991/92 steelhead spawning season. Staff also
monitors public fishing access to the lake during trout season (April to November).
Conveyance System
The conveyance system .(Figure 1) conveys water from the reservoir to the Whale Rock
Commission member agencies located between the reservoir and the City of San Luis Obispo.
Outlets from the pipeline exist for water deliveries to Chorro Reservoir and water treatment
plant (operated by the California Men's Colony), Cal Poly State University, and the City's water
treatment plant.
The Whale Rock pipeline is approximately 17 miles long, connecting the reservoir to the
member agencies, and terminates at the City's water treatment plant. The design capacity of the
City of San Luis Obispo 5
Urban Water Management Phu, .
pipeline is 18.94 cubic feet per second (approximately 8,500 gallons per minute). The line
consists of modified prestressed concrete cylinder pipe at most locations. Cement mortar lined
steel pipe is used at creek crossings and junctions. The pipeline has surge protection consisting
of eight-inch, globe type, diaphragm-actuated pressure relief valves which protect the line from
excessive pressures. The cathodic protection system consists of sacrificial anodes and test
stations located in areas subject to galvanic corrosion. Recent inspections of the inside of the
pipeline indicate the condition of the pipeline to be very good with no rehabilitation needed in
the near future.
Two pump stations transmit the water along the pipeline to member agencies. The first pump
station is located in Cayucos at Chaney Way (elevation 44 feet). The second station is located
in Camp San Luis Obispo, approximately six miles southeast of Morro Bay (elevation 181 feet).
Each station has five pumps which are capable of varying flow rates requested by member
agencies. Upgrades to both pump stations, which included the addition of two pumps at each
station, were completed in August 1993.
Cayucos Atascadero
N
Whale Rock
Reservoit'u \
�Q� ����`" s/
/ G 1�_E Wles
\ Off• ..J
.p, Q. PumpSts 1 Station A
Sts t t0+00 .
ss`9 a?°r
0 101
�o o/' CREEK Santa
n 1 sp, J / � ••� Margarita
0k� EK
Chorro Water
0 I) Treatment Plant
n I rAorro Bay
2 I � eRFssba 1 � •'/f ZOpE Chorro Reservoir
r ,J 1 V59t+Poet a
(S Pang StatioB Sta 729+40 J . Flow from Salinas Reservon Sta 603+50 Chorro Lateral AbaMrned
Sta 796+38 San Luis
���///�
Obispo
San Luis Obispo. Ferebay �r Water
1 City Water Treatment Plan! Treatment
Sta 857+00 Plant
EP Powel:lant
WHALE ROCK and Outle:at City 10
Water Treatment Plant onnection to Abandoned
CONVEYANCE City Water Treatment Plant
CONDUIT San Lrds obis Location Map
Figure 1 WHALE ROCK CONVEYANCE SYSTEM
Operating Agreements
Several agreements establish policy for the operation of the Whale Rock system and actions of
the member agencies. A brief description of the existing agreements follows:
6 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Plan
I. Agreement for the construction and operation of the Whale Rock Project, 1957, set forth
the project's capital cost distribution to the member agencies.
2. A supplemental operating agreement, 1960, established the Whale Rock Commission and
apportioned the operating costs.
3. Downstream water rights agreement, 1958, established water entitlements for adjacent and
downstream water users. The downstream water users (Cayucos Area Water Organization or
CAWO) affected by this agreement consist of three public water purveyors and the cemetery.
In addition to the agencies, water entitlements were identified for separate downstream land
owners.
Entitlements are as follows:
■ Cayucos Area Water Organization ("CAWO") 600 Acre-feet
Paso Robles Beach Water Association
Morro Rock Mutual Water Company
County Water District #8
Cayucos-Morro Bay Cemetery District
■ Mainini 50
■ Ogle 14
Total Downstream Entitlement 664 Acre-feet
4. A decision and order by the Fish and Game Commission of the State of California,
October 24, 1964, required the Whale Rock Commission to stock the reservoir with 17,500
rainbow trout (between six and eight inches long) each year.
5. Superior Court decision #36101, 1977, required the Whale Rock Commission to allow
public entry to the reservoir for fishing. In 1981, construction was completed on access trails
and sanitary facilities at the reservoir, and public fishing began at the lake.
6. The City of San Luis Obispo and the San Luis Obispo Community College District
(Cuesta College) reached an agreement in 1987 to deliver up to 110 AF of untreated Whale Rock
water to the California Men's Colony Water Treatment Facility, for treatment and distribution
to the Cuesta College campus.
7. An agreement for water allocation and operational policy between the agencies forming
the Whale Rock Commission. The agreement established the accounting procedures to allow
each agency to carry over excess or deficit water each year.
8. An agreement between the Whale Rock Commission and the California Men's Colony,
1990, to establish maintenance and operation criteria for the Chorro Booster pumps. The
Chorro Booster pumps were installed by the Commission on the California Men's Colony
turnout from the Whale Rock line to reduce system pressures required to provide full flow to
City of San Luis Obispo 7
Urban Water Management Pla..
the California Men's Colony water treatment plant. Pump and pump station maintenance, per
the agreement, are the responsibility of the California Men's Colony.
Operation and Maintenance Evaluation
Current reservoir staff consists of three full-time, regular employees and one part-time
employee. Reservoir staff are responsible for ongoing maintenance and operational duties which
include:
■ Inlet and outlet structure maintenance. Routine valve operations, trash rack cleaning,
outlet vault valve operation, lubrication, adjustments and repairs.
■ Reservoir structural instrumentation. Weekly recordings and analysis of piezometers,
groundwater levels, reservoir and underdrain seepage data, and erosion and slippage
control information.
■ Percolation pond operation. Daily regulation of the water releases to the pond areas
to optimize water availability to the downstream water agencies. Occasional dredging
of the pond areas has been necessary to maintain satisfactory pumping levels for the
downstream users.
■ Reservoir patrol and security. Daily surveillance of the reservoir, fences, and dam
areas.
■ Hydroelectric power generation. Coordinating flows to the downstream percolation
ponds. The power generation plant is only operated when storage at the reservoir nears
capacity which would warrant excess water releases.
■ Pipeline pumps and pumping stations. Daily inspections during operational periods
for readings, adjustments, and pump efficiency evaluation.
■ Water meters. Monthly readings and reporting of deliveries to the various agencies and
individuals. The meters monitored include Whale Rock member agencies' meters,
Cayucos Area Water Organization well meters and certain private party meters. Periodic
maintenance is required for the proper operation of these meters.
■ Cathodic protection. Annual monitoring of stations to ensure that the water
transmission line is properly maintained and protected.
■ The seasonal steelhead hatchery. Recently introduced to help alleviate a long term
deficiency in the availability of native steelhead trout for fish enhancement at Whale
Rock. Native adult steelhead are captured at the reservoir and spawned, then the young
are raised at the facility in circular pens until they are old enough to re-introduce to the
reservoir. The hatchery program requires daily observation, treatments, and feeding of
the young steelhead during the rearing period, usually February through July or August.
Volunteer assistance is frequently used to assist in the hatchery operation.
8 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Phu.
Recommendations for System Improvements
With the upgrades of the pump stations which were completed in August, 1993, combined with
the cathodic system maintenance program which insures the reliability of the water transmission
line, it is anticipated that the raw water delivery system will not require capital improvements
in the near future. One area of concern at the reservoir is earth movement occurring close to
the fishing facility near Old Creek Road. The facility is located in an area which has been
impacted by soil slippage. Due to the current low interest in Whale Rock fishing, and the
hazardous condition at the facility's access driveway, the area has been closed to the public. An
increase in fishing activity at the reservoir would necessitate repair of the access and parking
areas. At the appropriate time, a specific proposal will be presented to Whale Rock commission
for approval.
Staffing Evaluation
Existing staffing levels are considered adequate for current workloads. However, as previously
mentioned, increased fishing activity at the reservoir could require additional monitoring and
repair of the facility and access trails. The existing Whale Rock staff have adjusted work
schedules to permit daily observation of the fishing access areas which eliminates the need for
seasonal fishing program personnel. Additional use would demand more of the staff's time
which would ultimately have a negative impact on the reservoir's over-all operation and
maintenance. Staff will closely monitor the fishing program at the reservoir and present a
recommendation to the Whale Rock Commission if the fishing activity increases beyond the
capabilities of the current staff to adequately monitor the access areas.
1.3.3 GROUNDWATER
Introduction
The City's major source of water was groundwater until 1944 when the City began to use water
from Salinas Reservoir. In 1943, the City pumped 1,380 acre-feet of groundwater.
Groundwater was used again during the summer of 1948, when 440 acre-feet were pumped.
In the intervening years, until 1986, most groundwater in the City was used by agriculture and
very little was used for domestic consumption. As a result of the drought beginning in 1986 and
decreasing surface water supplies, the City activated groundwater wells in 1989 to meet the
City's water demand.
The principal source of groundwater for the City is the San Luis Obispo Groundwater Basin.
The basin is fifteen square miles and is drained by San Luis Obispo Creek. It extends from the
northern limits of the City and continues southerly along the alignment of the creek to just south
of Buckley Road. In the Los Osos Valley area, the basin extends four miles west to the Los
Osos Basin, which includes the community of Los Osos/Baywood Park.
City of San Luis Obispo 9
Urban Water Management P,_
In 1990, at the height of the drought, the City had seven potable wells which accounted for
approximately 50% of the water supplied during that period. The current groundwater program
uses four potable wells and two irrigation wells. Two of the City's wells, known as the Auto
Park Way and Denny's wells, were shut down in 1992 and 1993 due to elevated nitrate levels.
This is discussed in more detail in Chapter 4.
Operation
Operation and maintenance of the groundwater wells for the City is provided by the Water
treatment plant staff. The well sites require daily inspections, at a minimum, to ensure proper
operation of the facilities. Each site includes pumps, valves, meters and other related
appurtenances, as well as necessary chlorine metering equipment for proper disinfection as
required by the State Department of Health Services. Monthly production rates and biweekly
water levels are recorded and maintained by staff.
The Auto Park Way well required the use of granular activated carbon ("GAC")absorption tanks
for the removal of tetrachloroethylene ("PCE") which has contaminated the groundwater in the
area of this well. Operation and maintenance of the GAC treatment facility required more staff
time than the other well sites. Elevated nitrate levels in excess of the State's regulations
required the discontinuance of the well's use in October 1992. The Denny's well on Calle
Joaquin was taken out of service in June 1993 due to increasing nitrate contamination.
Operation and Maintenance Evaluation
The operation and maintenance of City wells are adequately handled by the existing personnel
at the Water Treatment Plant. No increase in staff is anticipated in the near future.
Recommended System Improvements
There are several options for reducing maintenance and operating costs. One option is the
installation of variable frequency drive pumps, which could reduce energy consumption and
electrical bills for pumping water. This option should be implemented if analysis reveals a
favorable cost benefit ratio.
Treatment options for the nitrate contamination at Auto Park Way well will be presented to
Council upon completion of the evaluation of alternatives. Treatment of groundwater is
recommended as a viable, cost effective source of supply. Re-establishment of the Auto Park
Way well will ensure that minimum safe annual yield projections of groundwater are realized.
10 City of San Luis Obispo
CHAPTER 2
WATER POLICY
Introduction
This chapter contains the water policies to ensure that adequate supplies of water are available
to meet both current and projected future water demand for the City of San Luis Obispo.
Chapter 2 constitutes the Water Element of the General Plan, and replaces the water section of
the Water and Wastewater Management Element. Because of the length and complexity of the
policies, a summary of all the policy statements contained in this Plan is presented in Appendix
I.
2.1 SAFE ANNUAL YIELD
PoNd
2.1.1 BASIS FOR PLANNING
The City will plan for future development and for water supplies based on the amount of water
which can be supplied each year, under critical drought conditions. This amount, called "safe .
annual yield," will be formally adopted by the Council. The safe annual yield determination will
be revised as significant new information becomes available, and as water sources are gained
or lost. The determination will consider a staff analysis, which will recommend an amount
based on coordinated use of all water sources. Each change to safe annual yield will be
reflected in an amendment of this Plan.
2.1.2 SAFE YIELD AMOUNT
The City's safe annual yield of potable water is 7,735 acre-feet, based on 7,235 acre-feet from
the coordinated operation of Salinas Reservoir and Whale Rock Reservoir, and 500 acre-feet of
groundwater.
2.1.3 GROUNDWATER
A. The amount of groundwater which the City will rely upon towards safe annual yield is
identified in Section 2.1.2. The City will maximize the use of groundwater in
conjunction with other available water supplies to maximize the yield and long term
reliability of all water resources and to minimize overall-costs for meeting urban water
demands. The City shall monitor water levels at the well sites to determine whether
City of San Luis Obispo 11
Urban Water Management Pko -
reduction or cessation of pumping is appropriate when water levels approach historic low
levels.
B. The.City will not compete with local agricultural use of groundwater outside the urban
reserve line or damage wildlifehabitat through reduced natural stream flows in obtaining
long-term sources of water supply.
Basis for Policy
Safe annual yield is the amount of water that can reliably be produced by the City's water supply
to meet the water demand. It is estimated by simulating the operation of the City's water supply
sources over an historical period to determine the maximum level of demand which could be met
during the most severe drought for which records are available.
The safe annual yield of an individual source of water supply is defined.as the quantity of water
which can be withdrawn every year, under critical drought conditions. Safe annual yield
analyses of water supply sources are based on rainfall, evaporation and stream flow experienced
during an historical period. The City of San Luis Obispo uses a period beginning in 1943,
which covers drought periods in 1946-51, 1959-61, 1976-77, and 1986-91. The Historical period
used in the latest computer analysis to determine safe annual yield extends from 1943 through
1991 and includes the most recent drought. Although future conditions are unlikely to occur in
the precise sequence and magnitudes as have occurred historically, this technique provides a
reliable estimate of the future water supply capability of the existing sources, since the long term
historical record is considered a good indicator of future conditions.
The safe annual yield gradually declines as silt accumulates in the reservoirs, thereby reducing
storage capacity. This is discussed in more detail in Section 2.5.
Current Safe.Annual_Yield Analysis
Prior to 1991, the "controlling drought period" for determining safe annual yield was 1946 to
1951. The adopted safe annual yield estimate of 7,235 acre-feet (from surface sources) uses the
controlling drought period 1986 to 1991. This .safe annual yield estimate was adopted by
Council as part of the 1992-93 Water Operational Plan. The adopted safe annual yield from .
Salinas and Whale Rock Reservoirs, including 500 acre-feet of groundwater, is 7,735 acre-feet
per year..
Water Suooly Safe Annual Yield
Coordinated Operations of the Salinas 7,235 acre-feet
and Whale.Rock Reservoirs
Groundwater 500 acre-feet
TOTAL SAFE ANNUAL YIELD ; 7;735 acre-feet
12 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Pia,
Previous Safe Annual Yield Studies
Previous studies of the critical historical drought periods at Salinas and Whale Rock reservoirs
have indicated the following safe annual yields were available to the City:
Water Supply Safe Annual Yield Reference
Salinas Reservoir 4,800 acre-feet Corps of Engineers, 1977
Whale Rock Reservoir* 2,060 acre-feet Dept Water Resources, 1974
Coordinated Operation 500 acre-feet CH2M-Hill, 1985
Groundwater 500 acre-feet Water Operational Plan, 1993
TOTAL 7,860 acre-feet
*City's share of Whale Rock Reservoir safe annual yield.
Past safe annual yield analyses for the two reservoirs assumed independent operation and
historical data to the date of each report. The critical drought period for the previous studies
was 1946-51. The studies also assumed a minimum pool at Salinas and Whale Rock of 400 and
500 acre-feet respectively. "Coordinated operation" is a concerted effort to operate the two
reservoirs together for maximum yield. Since Salinas Reservoir spills more often than Whale
Rock Reservoir, due to its larger drainage area and more favorable runoff characteristics, and
has higher evaporation rates, the combined yield from the two reservoirs can be increased by
first using Salinas to meet the City's demand and then using Whale Rock as a backup source
during periods when Salinas is below minimum pool'or unable to meet all of the demand. The
500 acre-feet increase in safe annual yield was a preliminary estimate of the additional yield
attributed to coordinated operations of the reservoirs identified in the 1985 report prepared by
CH2M-Hill.
In 1988, the City contracted with the engineering firm of Leedshill-Herkenhoff, Inc., to prepare
a detailed analysis of the City's water supplies and safe annual yield, based on coordinated
operation of the reservoirs. The report "Coordinated Operations Study for Salinas and Whale
Rock reservoirs" was completed in 1989. The study estimated total safe annual yield for the
City from the two reservoirs to be 9,080 acre-feet per year. Since the study period was only
to 1988 and the City was in a drought period of unknown length, this amount was never adopted
by Council. It should be emphasized that this estimate assumed that the "controlling drought
period" was 1946 to 1951 and that Whale Rock Reservoir is used only when Salinas is below
minimum pool or can not meet the monthly City demand, and does not consider limitations on
the use of Salinas water due to water quality constraints.
Following the end of the of 1986-1991 drought, staff updated the computer program created by
Leedshill-Herkenhoff to estimate the impact of the drought on safe annual yield of the reservoirs.
The analysis determined that the recent drought was the critical drought of record for the two
City of San Luis Obispo 13
Urban Water Management Pi,...
reservoirs, reducing the safe annual yield to 7,235 acre-feet per year as identified in the•previous
section for the current safe annual yield analysis:
Groundwater Resources
The groundwater basin which underlies the City of San Luis Obispo is relatively small.
Therefore, extractions in excess of 500 acre-feet.'per year during extended drought periods
cannot be relied upon. Since the basin is small, it tends to fully recharge following significant
rainfall periods. Following periods of above average rainfall, the groundwater basin may be
capable of sustaining increased extraction rates to meet City water demands. Since both Salinas
Reservoir and the groundwater basin fill up and "spill" following significant-rain periods, there
is a benefit in drawing from these sources firstaril leaving Whale Rock Reservoir as a backup
supply. The conjunctive use of the groundwater basin and surface water supplies in this manner
will provide an effective management strategy which increases the reliability of all the resources
to meet current and future water demands.
Another benefit to maximizing groundwater use is that it typically requires minimal treatment
which reduces costs compared to surface water supplies. Even with treatment for nitrates and
PCE, the projected costs associated with that treatment show groundwater to be comparable to
other alternative future water supply projects.
Past City policy has been .not to compete with agriculture for use of groundwater resources.
Recognizing the importance of the open space provided.by agricultural land outside the urban
reserve line, the City will continue to endorse this policy.
14 City of San Luis ON
spo
Urban Water Management Plan
2.2 WATER CONSERVATION
Poud
2.2.1 LONG-TERM WATER EFFICIENCY
The City will implement water-efficiency programs which will maintain long-term, per-capita
usage at or below the per capita use rate as identified in Section 2.3.2.
2.2.2 SHORT-TERM WATER SHORTAGES
Short-term mandatory measures, in addition to the long-term programs, will be implemented
when the City's water supplies are projected to last three years or less based on projected water
consumption, coordinated use of all city water supply sources, and considering the drought
pattern on which safe yield is based (or response to other situations which may interrupt supply).
Basis for PolicX
Water conservation was referenced as a part of the City's water management policy in 1973.
In 1985, the City adopted the Annual Water Operational Plan policy which established water
conservation as a means of extending water supplies during projected water shortages. Since
1985, many technological and philosophical changes have occurred which are proving water
conservation to be both a short term corrective measure for immediate water supply shortages
and a long term solution to water supply reliability.
A comprehensive evaluation of the potential water savings from current water conservation
technologies and programs is included as Appendix V to this Plan. -Based on the reliability of
the water conservation measures which were evaluated, and the cost effectiveness of the
proposed programs, a long term reduction in water demand of approximately twenty percent
from the average per capita use recorded in 1986-87 is used for planning for future water
conservation programs as well as future water supply needs.
Because of the experience during the drought of 1986 to 1991, the City has developed a short
term plan to deal with immediate water shortages and has recognized the importance of water
efficiency by supporting long term programs. The City will reevaluate and update its water
conservation efforts in response to changing water demand, supplies, technology and economic
conditions.
City of San Luis Obispo 15
Urban Water Management Play,
2.3 WATER DEMAND PROJECTIONS
&hft
2.3.1 BASIS OF PROJECTIONS
The City will project water requirements, considering long-term conditions and the full range
of water uses in the City. Separate projections of potable and nonpotable requirements will be
made.
2.3.2 WATER USE RATE
The City shall use 145 gallons per person per day (this equates to approximately 0.162 acre-foot
per person per year) and the number of City residents to plan total projected future water
demand. This quantity will be revised if warranted by long-term water use trends, including
differences in the relationship between residential and nonresidential usage. (Throughout this
Plan, 145 gallons per person per day is used in computations of future water demand.)
2.3.3 OVERALL PROJECTED DEMAND
Applying 145 gallons per person per day to a projected City resident population of about 56,000
at General Plan build-out results in a projected water demand of 9,096 acre-feet per year
(excluding demand from the Cal Poly campus, which has separate entitlements).
2.3.4 PRESENT WATER DEMAND
Present water demand shall be calculated by multiplying the water use identified in Section 2.3.2
by the current city population (as determined by the California Department of Finance,
Population Research Unit).
Basis for Polley
The City must know how much water will be needed to serve residents, businesses, and other
users to accommodate the General Plan. This quantity can be projected using different methods.
All methods involve assumptions about both future usage rates and the numbers and types of
users expected in the future. The quantity expressed in the policy above corresponds closely
with both (1) total city-wide usage compared with total resident population and (2) projections
of water demand based on usage by various land use categories. There always will be some
uncertainty in estimating development capacity (such as the number of dwellings or residents)
as well as the usage per customer type (such as acre-feet per dwelling or per resident.) The
estimating method must use reasonable assumptions, based on experience, to assure an adequate
level of water supply while not overstating demands.
Since the early 1970's, usage estimates have ranged from 0.17 to 0.22 acre-foot per resident per
year (about 155 to about 195 gallons per person per day). The estimates have vaned so widely
due to actual differences in consumption over time and to confusion about accounting for Cal
16 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Plan
Poly usage. (The City treats and delivers much of the water used by Cal Poly, even though Cal
Poly has separate entitlements.) Table 2.3 shows recent water usage compared with City
resident population. Table 2.3.2 compares the "per capita" and "land use" methods of
estimating water needs.
Table 2.3
WATER USE 1980-1993
.. . ........ ......
Water from Total City::
.. ........
tar... V .. .:
...... . VTPand
...........
Wells.1 Demand .....Total ... ..... City
_ Population '` ::.. ::. GPC/.Day GPC/Day
............. ....
1980 6,745 6,145 34,252 176 160
1981 6,941 6,341 34,759 178 163
1982 6,584 5,984 35,239 167 152
1983 6,800 6,200 35,660 169 155
1984 7,862 7,262 36,407 182 178
1985 8,025 7,425 37,378 193 177
1986 8,367 7,767 38,205 196 181
1987 8,399 7,799 38,282 196 182
1988 8,411 7,811 39,858 188 175
4 1989 6,004 5,404 41,027 129 118
1990 4,796 4,196 41,958 102 89
1991 4,640 4,040 42,178 98 86
1992 5,316 4,716 42,922 110 98
1993 5,572 4,972 43,415 115 102
Data from City Water Treatment Plant production reports. Includes Cal Poly potable water.
2 Cal Poly water use assumed constant for this period (600 acre feet per year).
3 January 1 population estimates -California Department of Finance, Population Research Unit,
as revised through 1993.
4 Bolded, italicized years (1989 - 1991) indicate mandatory rationing years.
City of San Luis Obispo 17
Urban Water Management Plov.
Table 2.3.2
PER CAPITA WATER USE
Method 1: Water Treatment Plant Production and Population Method 2: Metered Use by Development Type and Land Use Element
Per Capita Water Use-Based on Historic Demand,Population and Conservation Per Capita Water Use-Bmed on Land Use,Historic Demand and Conservation
Annual Demand 1097-Year highest use 8,397 acre feet Type of SFResid 3,630 acre feet
Land Use- MFResid 2,633
Genre/Plan Retail Comm 422
Less Cel Poly Subtract 6W acre feet from total, 7,797 acre feet Build-out office 393
hosed on average demand (1992 Hearing Draft) Svc Industry 438
MoteVHotel 608
Hoop,Schools,Parka 1,432
Per Capita Use Comertto gallon;and 182 gallons/day Total Acre Feet (1) 9,556 acre feet
tlhede by 365. Divide
by Dept of Finance
populeeon ea9mats(36.2821- Per Capita Use Convert to gallons and 152 gallons/day
divide by 365. Dwlde
Leas 20%long. Subtract lox 145 gallons/day by estimated bund-out
term conservatiotr
populatlon(59,11000).
Excludes Cal Poly pop.
(1) Land Use rates Include 20%long term conservation compared to pe-1987 use.
Based on the analysis of these two approaches and the inclusion of long term water conservation
programs, 145 gallons per day per person is used throughout this Plan for long term water
supply planning purposes.
Table 2.3.4
CALCULATION OF PRESENT (1994) WATER DEMAND
Gallons per r: City . Gallons per.... Days m
person.per day Population. Acre Foot aYear :.; Current Demand'
I acre-foot
145 43,415 325,851 gallons 365 7,052 acre feet
18 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Plan
2.4 RELIABILITY RESERVE
Poli .
In seeking and accounting for new water supplies, the City will strive for a "reliability reserve"
of 2,000 acre-feet safe annual yield (about 20 percent of projected future water demand at full
build-out).
Basis for Polfc
The concept of "reliability reserve" for long range water planning was presented to the City
Council in 1990. At that time, the City was in the midst of an extreme drought and was
considering building a desalination plant to meet projected short term water supply deficits. This
reserve is intended to maintain adequate City water supplies during unpredictable changes such
as a new worst case drought, loss of one of the City's water sources, contamination of a source,
or failure of a new source to provide projected yield, and not to allow additional development.
Originally, California water law was created to provide certainty in water supply for individuals
or agencies using a source. However, changing water laws now provide little certainty for
planning future supplies. Recent decisions requiring additional downstream releases for
environmental protection purposes, such as those affecting Mono Lake and the Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta, have shown that the impacts on all users associated with water supply projects
sometimes must be addressed.
The City's water supply sources may also be jeopardized by water quality and drought
conditions. Contamination or new requirements for water treatment could reduce the available
supply to the City for an extended period. Also, current safe annual yield estimates for Salinas
and Whale Rock reservoirs are based on historical data since 1943. The recent drought of 1986-
1991 is the controlling period for safe annual yield calculations. If there is a future drought
more extreme than this period, the safe annual yield of the reservoirs will likely be reduced.
These uncertainties prompted the Council to establish a reliability reserve of 2,000 acre-feet to
protect the City from water shortages in the future (March 3, 1993, Resolution No. 8135). The
reserve will not guarantee that the City will never experience water shortages in the future, but
will reduce the impacts associated with reductions in available supplies.
City of San Luis Obispo 19
Urban Water Management P"
2.5 SILTATION AT SALINAS AND WHALE ROCK RESERVOIRS
P�
The City shall develop 500 acre-feet safe annual yield to account for the loss of water storage
capacity due to siltation at Whale Rock and Salinas reservoirs to the year 2025.
Basis for Policy
Siltation at reservoirs is a natural occurrence which can substantially reduce the storage capacity
over long periods. The reduction of available storage will reduce the safe annual yield of the
reservoirs. Siltation at reservoirs varies depending on factors such as rainfall intensity and
watershed management practices. There have been numerous reports addressing siltation at
Salinas reservoir, but no studies have been done for Whale Rock reservoir.
Table 2.5.1 lists the studies for Salinas reservoir and the estimated storage capacities. During
the recent drought, water at Salinas reservoir fell to record low levels. Recognizing the unique
opportunity presented by the low water level, the County contracted with a local engineering
consultant to provide an aerial survey of the lake and prepare revised storage capacity
information. The latest information reveals that the survey conducted in 1975 may have over
estimated the siltation rate at the reservoir. Early studies indicated average annual siltation rates
from 23 acre-feet per year to 34 acre-feet per year. The study done by the U.S. Geological
Survey in 1975 estimated that the siltation rate was approximately 82 acre-feet per year. The
latest information indicates that the siltation rate is on the order of 40 acre-feet per year.
Table 2.5.1
SALINAS RESERVOIR CAPACITY STUDIES
Total Usable Avg Annual Loss'
; Agency Y Capacity Capacity Usable°Capacity
Year A
(afl latl;... (afyl
1941 U.S. Army 44,800 26,000 -
1947 U.S. Soil Conservation Service - 25,860 23.3
1953 U.S. Soil Conservation Service
and U.S. Forest Service - 25,590 34.2
1975 U.S. Geological Survey 41,400 23,200 82.4
1990 County of San Luis Obispo 41,791 24,035 40.1
Usable capacities are shown at the 1,301.0-foot spillway elevation because the usable capacity at the
1,300.7-foot elevation for the 1947 and 1953 studies could not be accurately determined. Usable capacity
at the 1,300.7-foot elevation for the 1941 survey was determined to be 25,800 acre-feet and for th 1975
survey was 23,000 acre-feet.
20 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Pia..
Since Whale Rock is used as a backup supply for the City, it may be many years until the lake
level drops to the point where an aerial survey of siltation can be economically performed.
Since no information is available to indicate what rate of siltation is occurring at the Whale Rock
reservoir, it is assumed for planning that the annual average rate of siltation is similar to Salinas
reservoir. The reliability reserve discussed in Section 2.4 can offset the additional long term
loss.
The safe annual yield from the two reservoirs will be continually reduced as a result of siltation.
The key items which need to be assumed to estimate reduction in safe annual yield are the
average annual siltation rate and the future date for the estimate. If the future date is assumed
to be the year 2025, then a certain loss in safe annual yield can be calculated using the City's
computer model.
Since the storage capacity for Salinas reservoir was last estimated in 1990, the annual loss of
40 acre-feet per year can be applied from that date. However, since Whale Rock reservoir's
siltation has never been factored into the total available water storage, the loss of 40 acre-feet
per year would apply to the period since the reservoir was constructed in 1961.
Using a planning
horizon to the year SAFE ANNUAL YIELD REDUCTION
2025, there will be DUE TO SILTATION
an estimated loss of
storage capacity at
Salinas and Whale Reduction of Combined Reservoir Yield (AF.Y.)
Rock reservoirs of -200
1,400 of and 2,560
J.
af respectively. -300
Based on this
storage capacity
-400
reduction, there
-500 ....................... ............ .... .....
will be an estimated
reduction in the -s0o
City's safe annual
field of 500 af. -700 - .
The results of the
analysis are shown -800
in Figure 2. This 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Year
loss in yield needs
to be taken into Figure 2 SAFE ANNUAL YIELD REDUCTION DUE TO SILTATION
account when
determining if the City has adequate water supplies to meet future water demand. Future water
supply projects will need to make up for this loss in safe annual yield.
City of San Luis Obispo 21
Urban Water Management P1._
2.6 SUPPLEMENTAL WATER REQUIREMENTS
Policy
2.6.1 SUPPLEMENTAL WATER REQUIREMENT
The City shall develop additional water supplies to meet the projected demand at build-out of
the City's General Plan (Table 2.6.1) and to establish the reliability reserve and to offset water
yields lost due to siltation. The supplemental water supply amount shall be based on the
adopted per capita water use figure identified for.planning purposes in Section 2.3.
2.6.2 SUPPLEMENTAL WATER SOURCES
In deciding appropriate sources of supplemental water, the City will evaluate impacts on other
users. of the water and other environmental impacts, total and unit costs, reliability, water
quality, development time, and quantity available.
2.6.3 PAYING FOR SUPPLEMENTAL WATER FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT
The cost for developing new water supplies necessary for new development will be paid by
impact fees set at a rate sufficient to cover the annual debt service cost of the new water supplies
attributable to new development.
Basis for Policy
Based on the Land Use Element adopted by the City Council in August 1994 and a per capita
use rate of 145 gallons per person per day (Section 2.3), the projected total amount of water for
the City to serve General Plan build-out is 11,596 acre-feet (af). This figure includes the 2,000
acre-feet reliability reserve and 500 acre-feet siltation reserve. Table 2.6.2 shows the build-out
water requirement, reliability reserve, siltation loss, and the resulting supplemental water
requirement necessary to meet projected City water demand.
Table 2.6.1
REQUIRED SAFE ANNUAL YIELD
FOR GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
Annual AF @
.145 gal'per PercegfT '.
Population day percapita of Total
Existing Development 43,415 7,052 77.5%
New Development 12,585 2,044 22.5%
TOTAL 56,000 91096 100.0%
22 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Phu,
Table 2.6.2
NEW WATER SUPPLY REQUIREMENTS
(in acre feet)
Required Safe Annual Yield 9,096
Current Safe Annual Yield 7,735
Additional Safe Annual Yield Required
(based on per capita water demand ratios) 1,361
Additional Safe Annual Yield Required 1,361
Reliability Reserve 2,000
Siltation Reserve 5
00
Total Water Supply Requirement :3,861
City policy adopted in 1987 as part of the Water Element states that the costs of developing
supplemental water sources will be borne by those maldng new connections to the water system.
Policy 2.6.3 continues this policy and is consistent with the Land Use Element policy 1.13.4 (see
Appendix H.)
City of San Luis Obispo 23
Urban Water Management Pla.
2.7 MULTI-SOURCE WATER SUPPLY
Poud
The City shall continue to develop and use water resources projects to maintain multi-source
water supplies, and in this manner, reduce reliance on any one source of water supply and
increase its supply options in future droughts or other water supply emergencies.
Basis for Policy
Having several sources of water can avoid dependence on one source that would not be available
during a drought or other water supply reduction or emergency. There may be greater reliability
and flexibility if sources are of different types (such as surface water and ground water) and if
the sources of one type are in different locations (such as reservoirs in different watersheds).
The Water Element of the General Plan, adopted in 1987, identified multiple water projects to
meet projected short and long term water demand. Again in November 1990, the Council
endorsed the multi-source concept.
24 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Piaa
2.8 ALLOCATION OF NEW WATER SUPPLIES
Policy
2.8.1 BALANCING SAFE YIELD AND OVERALL DEMAND
When new water sources are obtained, the additional safe yield shall be allocated first to
eliminate any deficit between the adopted safe annual yield (Section 2.1) and the present
demand as defined in Sections 2.1 and 2.3.4 at the time the new source is obtained.
2.8.2 SUPPLYING NEW DEVELOPMENT
A. The City will make available to new development only that amount of safe yield which
exceeds present water use (Section 2.3.4). Available allocations will be assigned to
development in a way that supports balanced growth, consistent with the General Plan.
Allocations from a new water supply project shall be considered available at the time project
construction is initiated.
B. Any additional safe annual yield beyond that needed to balance safe annual yield and present
demand will be allocated (A)one-half to the reliability reserve and compensating for reduced
yields due to siltation and (B) one-half to development, subject to the requirements in
Section 2.8.3, "Reserve for Intensification and Infill".
C. Until all toilet and showerhead fixtures in the City are replaced with low flow toilet and
showerhead fixtures, the amount by which safe annual yield (Section 2.1.2) exceeds present
demand resulting from the assumption that 100% of the retrofit is complete (Section 2.3.4),
shall not be made available to development.
2.8.3 RESERVE FOR INTENSIFICATION AND INFILL DEVELOPMENT
A sufficient amount of water supply, including the potential water savings from replacing water
fixtures in the City (Section 2.9.1), will be held in reserve to serve intensification and infill
within existing City limits as of July 1994.
2.8.4 ACCOUNTING FOR RECLAIMED WATER
Reclaimed water shall be accounted for as a "nonpotable" supply as identified under Section
2.10.3. Use of reclaimed water shall not be considered as a component of the City's safe annual
yield, but may reduce demand for potable water supplies as reclaimed water use increases.
2.8.5 PRIVATE WATER SUPPLIES
When developments are supplied by private groundwater wells, the yield of those wells will not
be counted toward the City's safe annual yield. Such yield, however, will result in the demand
City of San Luis Obispo 25
Urban Water Management PI.
for City water supplies being lower than it otherwise would be, which may necessitate
adjustments of the per capita water usage figure used to estimate overall demand.
Basis for Po
The City has pursued numerous water supply projects over the years. These projects are
discussed in Chapter 3 of this report. This section of the document addresses allocation of these
supplies once the yields from projects are realized. The City has identified these potential uses
for new supplies:
■ Eliminating any deficit between adopted planning figures and safe annual yield;
■ Compensating for reduced yields due to reservoir siltation;
■ Establishing a reliability reserve;
■ Providing for water requirements for future development within the urban reserve area
designated in the General Plan.
Allocation of new supplies can balance the needs of all areas identified while not compounding
the potential water shortage problems for existing City water customers.
In their deliberations regarding services for new development when considering the General Plan
Land Use Element update on June 14, 1994, Council approved a policy which states,
"...development in an annexed area may be approved only when adequate
City services can be provided for that development, without reducing the
level of services or increasing the cost of services for existing development
and build-out within the City limits as of July 1994." (Section 1.13.4,
Development and Services, General Plan Land Use Element).
Policy 2.8.3 supports this Land Use policy by holding in reserve adequate water for infill and
intensification within the existing city limits. Table 2.8.1 shows the amount of water required
to support build-out within the July 1994 city limits and the amount of water available for
annexation areas, available through retrofit savings.
26 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Plan
Table 2.8.1
WATER TO SERVE BUILD-OUT OF CITY (1994 Boundaries)
AND AVAILABLE FOR ANNEXATION AREAS
si
.:....WATER NEEDED TO SUPPLY::FULL:;BUILD.-. UT�'OVCITY.ai:bf:July 1994
...........
Population at build-out of City Total water needed
(1994 city boundaries) (assuming 145 gallons/
person/day)
47,420 7,702 acre feet/year
.... ..... .
WATER AVAILABLE:FOR ANNEXATION.:CREATED THROUGH.RETROFIT:::
Safe Annual Yield 7,735 acre feet/year
Water needed at build-out of city (1994 boundaries) 7,702 acre feet/year
Available for Annexation Areas /retrofit savings potential! 33 acre feet/year
Note: *Population figure based on land use policies adopted by Council in August 1994.
The adoption of 145 gallons/per person/per day as a water supply planning figure would indicate
water is available for development, eliminating the need for retrofitting. Since the 145
gallons/per person/per day assumes that the retrofit component of the water conservation
program is 100% complete (approximately 43% was completed as of July 1994), new
development will continue to retrofit until the City is completely retrofitted or construction is
initiated for a new water supply project.
City of San Luis Obispo 27
Urban Water Management Phu.
2.9 WATER ALLOCATION AND OFFSETS
Poli
2.9.1 EXEMPTIONS FOR OFFSETS
A. When there is no safe yield to allocate to a project, that project may be built if the developer
makes changes, in facilities served by the City, which will reduce long-term water usage
equal to twice the allocation required for the project, consistent with the policies in Section
2.8.
B. The City may exempt a project from needing an allocation or an offset, or it may reduce the
amount of the required allocation or offset, to the extent that the project is supplied by a
private well which will not significantly affect the yield of City wells. Such a well may be
operated by the owner of the property containing the well only for the owner's use. The
City will consider the cumulative effects of wells in the groundwater basin in making this
decision. Such wells may be used only when:
1. The City Council approves the well proposal as part of a specific land development
project approval, and the proposed well system meets all City standards;
2. A qualified, independent, hydrological investigation demonstrates that the well(s)reliably
can provide sufficient quality and quantity of water for the proposed land development
project and will not impact the yields from City wells.
2.9.2 BASIS FOR ALLOCATIONS AND OFFSETS
Required allocations and offsets will be based on long-term usage for each type of development.
(These use and offset factors will be determined and published by the City, and may be revised,
as warranted, by new information.)
Basis for Polio
In 1988, the City began to formally account for long-term water usage in new development.
The allocations have been based on histories of water usage for various kinds of development.
At first, the City decided to allocate some water for new land development projects even though
city-wide water usage exceeded safe yield. As the 1986-1991 drought continued, and the
projected completion of proposed supplemental supply projects moved farther into the future,
the City decided that there should be no new development that would increase water usage. As
a result, nearly all construction since 1990 has been:
■ Replacement buildings, using the same or less water;
■ Additions or remodels which do not substantially affect water usage; and
28 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Plan
■ Projects which have retrofitted facilities served by the City, to save (offset)twice the amount
of water which would be allocated to the project. Installation of low-flow toilets,
showerheads, and faucets have accounted for most of the offset credit. Substantial credits
were also earned by installing water recycling equipment in businesses.
Also, a few relatively small projects were able to do little or no retrofitting because they were
supplied with groundwater through private wells. Some projects have utilized more than one
of these strategies to proceed despite the lack of water allocations.
City of San Luis Obispo 29
.Urban Water Management Pla,,
2.10 RECLAIMED WATER
Policy
2.10.1 RECLAIMED WATER QUALITY
The City will produce high quality reclaimed water, suitable for wide range of nonpotable
uses.
2.10.2 USES OF RECLAIMED WATER
The City will make available reclaimed water to substitute for existing potable water uses as
allowed by law and to supply new nonpotable uses.
2.10.3 ACCOUNTING FOR RECLAIMED WATER
As reclaimed water supplies new developmenu or..substitutes for potable water in existing
development, reliable yield of nonpotable water will be increased. Reclaimed water will be
credited to non-potable reliable yield not when it is potentially available at the treatment plant,
but when it is actually available to a user.upon the completion of the necessary distribution
facilities.
2.10.4 CITY RECLAIMED WATER PROJECTS
When the City provides distribution facilities that allow substitution of reclaimed water for
potable water, the resulting reduction in potable water demand will be given offset credit for
government projects (including new City parks or buildings), under any policies or rules limiting
the amount of water which can be allocated to development projects.
2.10.5 PRIVATE RECLAIMED WATER PROJECTS
A. When-a developer of a private project provides distribution facilities that allow substitution
of reclaimed water in facilities that have used potable City water, the resulting reduction in
potable water demand will be credited to any allocation of potable water needed for the
developer's project, at a two-to-one ratio, similar to the offset credit.
B: When a developer of a private project provides distribution facilities that allow use of
reclaimed water in that project, any required potable water allocation for that project shall
be reduced by a corresponding amount.
2.10.6 COMBINED RECLAIMED WATER PROJECTS
When a component of the reclaimed water distribution system.is funded in part by the City and
in part by a private developer, the credit for reduction in potable water usage resulting from that
component:shall be divided in a proportionate share between the City and the developer based
on the respective contribution to the component.
30 _ _ City of San_Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Plan
Basis for Policy
Reclaimed water is highly treated wastewater (sewage) which can be used for most nonpotable
purposes. The City's Water Reclamation Facility (formerly known as the Wastewater Treatment
Plant) has been upgraded to the point the effluent can be used directly for landscape and
agricultural irrigation and other uses such as industrial processes and toilet flushing in certain
types of buildings.
Most treated effluent, in the past, has been discharged to San Luis Obispo Creek. A small
amount of effluent has been used at the treatment plant site for landscape irrigation. Reclaimed
water will be used for additional landscape irrigation at the Water Reclamation Facility and on
City-owned land in the vicinity, and for ponds to benefit wildlife.
Use of reclaimed water beyond the treatment plant area will require a distribution system
separate from other water lines. Reclaimed water can be used to supply nonpotable uses in new
development and to offset potable uses in existing development. These potential uses require
a deliberate method to account for reclaimed water use, consistent with policies concerning total
water requirements and other water sources.
Long-term funding for the necessary reclaimed water distribution system is expected to come
from charges for the use of reclaimed water. Initial expenses may be funded from bonds, low-
interest State loans, and developer contributions.
City of San Luis Obispo 31
Urban Water Management Phu.
2.11 WATER SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY
Pkl
The City will be the only purveyor of water within the City.
Basis for Policy
Historically, the City has been the sole water purveyor within the City limits. This allowed the
City to maintain uniformity of water service and distribution standards, and to be consistent in
developing and implementing water policy. In continuing to be the sole water purveyor, the
City will maintain control over water quality, distribution and customer service, as well as
ensure consistency with the City's General Plan policies and goals.
32 City of San Luis Obispo
CHAPTER 3
SUPPLEMENTAL WATER SUPPLY PROJECTS
WATER SUPPLY SOURCES
Policy
The City shall pursue the expansion of the Salinas reservoir, the Nacimiento Reservoir Diversion
project, water reuse and water demand management activities as supplemental water supply
sources to meet current and projected future water demand. Other water supply projects shall
be considered in the future if warranted.
3.1 SALINAS RESERVOIR EXPANSION PROJECT
Introduction
The Salinas Reservoir (also known as Santa Margarita Lake) was constructed in 1941. The
original design of the dam included operable spillway gates which would have increased the
maximum water surface elevation.at the spillway crest from 1,300.74 to approximately 1,320.0
feet. Because of uncertainties at the time of construction, the spillway gates were never
installed. The Salinas Reservoir expansion project would involve the installation of gates which
would result in an increase of available storage capacity from 23,843 acre-feet (af) to 41,790 of
with an increase of an estimated 1,650 acre-feet per year of safe annual yield.
Background
The Salinas Dam was constructed by the War Department (now U.S. Army Corps of Engineers)
in 1941 to provide water to Camp San Luis Obispo and the City of San Luis Obispo. The Corps
of Engineers filed and received an application to appropriate water from the Salinas River with
the Division of Water Resources (now State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Water
Rights) on May 27, 1941. The City of San Luis Obispo filed and received an identical permit
on June 4, 1941. The City's right to appropriate water for beneficial use is second in time and
right to the Corps permit. Both permits allow a direct diversion of up to 12.4 cubic feet per
second (cfs) between January ,1' and December 31" and a diversion to storage for later use of
up to 45,000 A.F. between November 1" and June 30' of each season. There is also a third
application to appropriate water from the Salinas River filed by San Luis Obispo County
Waterworks District No. 6 which serves the town of Santa Margarita. This permit was filed on
February 26, 1947 and allows for 1.5 cfs by direct diversion all year round and up to 200 A.F.
diverted to storage during the period from November V and June 30' of each season. Since this
permit was filed after the Corps and City's permits, it is junior to the rights of the other permits.
City of San Luis Obispo 33
Urban Water Management Ply
The original construction plans for the dam included the installation of an operable spillway gate
to provide an estimated storage capacity of approximately 45,000 acre-feet. During the "fast
track" construction of the dam, a small fault was discovered beneath the right abutment (right
side of dam, looking downstream). There was concern at the time for the dam stability and
therefore the gates were not installed. As a historical note, the spillway gates intended for the
Salinas Dam were installed at Friant Dam in the foothills above Fresno.
Studi
The Phase I report for "Salinas Reservoir Expansion Project" was completed in February 1989
by Woodward-Clyde Consultants. Part I of the report provided geotechnical, seismicity, and
dam safety evaluation. Part H analyzed the hydrology, reservoir yield, and an evaluation of
alternatives. The outcome of the analysis revealed that the dam was strong enough to withstand
a major earthquake (7.4 magnitude) on the nearby Rinconada Fault without failing or causing
a sudden release of water from the reservoir. The analysis also found that raising the dam 19
feet would produce an additional 1;650 acre-feet per yearof safe annual yield from the
reservoir.
The firm of.Woodward-Clyde Consultants was retained by the City in March of 1992 to prepare
the environmental impact report for the proposed Salinas Reservoir Expansion Project. Detailed
evaluation of the impacts associated with the raising of the maximum water surface elevation
revealed major impacts to the recreational facilities and roadways at the lake. It was determined
that a detailed recreational relocation plan was necessary to allow for the evaluation of the
impactsassociated with this work to be addressed in the EIR. The conceptual recreation
relocation plan has been completed to the satisfaction of County Parks staff and the draft EIR
was released in November 1993.
The EIR represents one of the two major hurdles that need to be crossed prior to proceeding
with the project. The second issue relates to the ownership of the Salinas Dam and related
facilities. The Corps of Engineers currently owns the dam and property surrounding the lake.
Since the facilities are not utilized to supply water to Camp San Luis Obispo, the Corps has
expressed interest for many years in relinquishing ownership of the facilities. The Corps has
indicated that they will not allow the expansion project to proceed unless ownership is
transferred to a local agency. The discussions concerning which local agency, either the City
or County of San Luis Obispo, should ultimately own the facilities has been debated for many
years. On November 17, 1992, the City Council supported the ownership transfer to the County
of San Luis Obispo, provided an acceptable agreement could be prepared which protects the
City's interests in the facilities. City and County staff have been working closely to develop an
agreement acceptable to both parties.
Project Schedule
Following certification of the EIR and agreement on the transfer of ownership in the facilities,
there are a number of additional steps which will have to be accomplished prior to proceeding
34 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Plan
with construction. The items are listed in Table 3.1 with estimated time frames necessary to
accomplish each task.
Table 3.1
SALINAS RESERVOIR EXPANSION PROJECT SCHEDULE
TASK TIME FRAME
—1. Ownership Transfer: Legislation allowing transfer studies 1 year
—2. Ownership Transfer: Studies necessary for transfer 6 months
—3. Permitting and Design 1 year
4. Construction 1 year
Project Cost
Salinas Reservoir Expansion
Studies $ 480,000
Design/Ownership Transfer 1,300,000
Construction 8.000.000
Total $9,780,000
City of San Luis Obispo 35
Urban Water Management Aiu. —
3.2 NACMENTO PROJECT
Introduction
San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District ("District") has an
entitlement of 17,500 acre feet per year of water from Nacimiento Reservoir. Boyle
Engineering was hired by the District to study the feasibility and make recommendations
regarding the transportation and use of this water. The City of San Luis Obispo requestedan
allocation of 3;380 acre-feet from the Nacimiento project, which is less than the original request
of 6,265. The reduction in the allocation requested is due to changes in per capita consumption
estimates and the handling of annexation areas.
Background
Nacimiento Reservoir is located in San Luis Obispo County on the Nacimiento River about 12
miles above its confluence with the Salinas River. The reservoir provides flood protection and
is a source of supply for groundwater recharge for the Salinas River Valley. The dam is owned
and operated by Monterey County.Flood Control and Water Conservation District. Although
Monterey County retains a majority of the water rights to the reservoir, San Luis Obispo County
is entitled to 17,500 acre-feet of water annually. Approximately 1,300 acre-feet per year have
been designated for use around the lake, leasing 16,200 acre-feet per year for allocation to other
areas within the County of San Luis Obispo.
The District contracted with Boyle Engineering to provide engineering services for an evaluation
of the Nacimiento project. The District requested that agencies interested in future participation
in the Nacimiento project share in the costs associated with the preliminary studies. The agency
costs.are proportional to the allocation requests. Asking the agencies to share in the cost of the
preliminary studies was intended to limit unrealistic requests. Among other requirements
established to limit allocation requests, each agency must show consistency with their approved
general plan.
The Preliminary Evaluation, approved by the Board of Supervisors on June 7, 1994, listed
purveyor allocation requests totalling 25,509 acre-feet per year. This was nearly sixty percent
greater than the 16,200 acre-feet available. Both County Service Area No. 22 and the Fiero
Lane Water Company requested an allocation of Nacimiento water. The City's request excludes
water to serve these areas, even though they are within the City's Urban Reserve Line and
designated for eventual annexation. At such time as these areas are annexed to the City, their
entitlements for Nacimiento water would go to the City.
Several alignment and treatment options are considered in the study prepared by Boyle
Engineering. Two alternatives involve use of Nacimiento water in the:North San Luis Obispo
County and the City of San Luis Obispo only. This water would be delivered either raw or
treated at a regional water treatment plant near Lake Nacimiento. The North County alternatives
would deliver water to purveyors along the 101 Freeway corridor to the City of San Luis
Obispo. A third alternative would deliver treated water to Chorro Valley as well as the North
County. The Chorro Valley turnout would provide water to coastal purveyors to the west. The
36 City of San_Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Pi,
County. The Chorro Valley turnout would provide water to coastal purveyors to the west. The
fourth alternative includes delivery of treated water to the North County, Chorro Valley, and
to coastal and inland purveyors to the south.
Studies
Phase I of the Boyle Engineering study involved an evaluation of the reliability of the
Nacimiento Project to deliver water at a maximum amount of 17,500 acre-feet per year. Phase
I was completed and presented to the County Board of Supervisors in December 1992. At the
December meeting, the Board also approved proceeding with Phase II of the feasibility study.
The results of the reliability assessment concluded that the Nacimiento Project can deliver 17,500
acre-feet per year based on historic hydrologic data. The analysis indicated a number of months
during the most recent drought when deliveries would have been reduced. However, deliveries
from subsequent months could be increased to make up for the reductions resulting in total
deliveries of 17,500 acre-feet for the year.
Phase II of the study provides a preliminary engineering evaluation, a geotechnical study, and
initial environmental review. The purpose of Phase II is to analyze and determine the best
pipeline alignments, to determine facility requirements, estimate costs, and to determine probable
environmental impacts. The draft reports were completed by December 1993. On January 25,
1994, the County Board of Supervisors met to consider the work done by Boyle Engineering.
The Board accepted the Preliminary Evaluation for the Nacimiento Water Supply Project, Phase
II, along with its Preliminary Engineering Evaluation and Environmental Assessment. Boyle
Engineering was directed to proceed with finalizing the report, incorporating and addressing
comments by the purveyors and by individual Board members.
Project Cost
The County has prepared participation and reservation agreements for the next phase of work.
This next phase includes preparation of an EIR and preliminary engineering. This work is
expected to be completed near the end of 1995.
Participation in the preliminary study and evaluation of the Nacimiento project cost the City
$55,862.
Even with the preliminary evaluation and feasibility study complete, several steps still remain
before the project can be constructed. Preparation and certification of an Environmental Impact
Report is the next major step in the Nacimiento project. Geotechnical studies and preliminary
design will also be performed before the final determination of project participation can be
made. These items are expected to cost $1,200,000. This equates to a cost of approximately
$75 per acre-foot of water requested for the feasibility/study stage alone. The City's share of
these costs is $253,500, reduced from the original estimate of $385,000, based on the reduced
allocation request. A separate participation agreement has been prepared for this phase of the
project.
City of San Luis Obispo 37
Urban Water Management Ph..
Once those studies are performed and the final participation in the project is determined, final
design of the facilities and project financing can be prepared. A final binding participation
agreement will be required for this phase. The total cost of the final design is expected to be
around $1 to $2 million, depending on which treatment and alignment alternative is selected.
The City will be required to pay its prorated share of these costs.
The remainder of the project involves the construction of the pipeline, related facilities, and
treatment plant(s). The construction will be debt-financed and the costs paid for through the
water pricing. Preliminary estimates indicate the cost of Nacimiento water to be approximately
$900 to $1,100 per acre-foot in 1993 dollars for the City of San Luis Obispo, depending on the
treatment and alignment alternative that is ultimately chosen.
38 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Pio..
3.3 WATER REUSE
Introduction
Reuse of the highly treated water produced by the City's Water Reclamation Facility is a drought
resistant portion of the City of San Luis Obispo's multi-source water plan. It is estimated that
50% of water used in the City is used for purposes where non-potable water would be adequate.
Recycled water has not been used by the City due to its low quality, regulatory constraints,
public acceptance, and cost of distribution. Increased demand for water and recent
improvements to the treatment process make it feasible to consider reuse as a source of water
for non-potable demands. Reclaimed water may be used for:
■ Irrigating parks, school yards, golf courses, and residential yards,
■ Washing cars, mixing concrete, compacting soil and controlling dust,
■ Process and cooling water for industrial applications,
■ Fire protection.
The objectives of the San Luis Obispo water reuse project are to:
1. Develop a dependable water supply that will meet non-potable demand,
2. Improve the water quality of San Luis Obispo Creek,
3. Comply with the Federal Clean Water Act and California Inland Surface Water Plan,
4. Efficiently manage the water resources of the City of San Luis Obispo.
Background
The Water Reclamation Facility produces approximately 4,000 acre-feet of disinfected tertiary
treated reclaimed water per year. This water is suitable for most uses other than drinking and
food preparation. Production is at a consistent rate of 5.5 cubic feet per second or 3.6 million
gallons per day. The City proposes to dedicate a release as determined in the Water Reuse
Program EIR currently being prepared for maintenance and enhancement of the in-stream habitat
of San Luis Obispo Creek.
The City conducted a survey in August, 1991, to determine the level of interest in the use of
recycled water. Several large volume irrigation users are potential customers. Ninety-five
percent of those responding to the survey were supportive of the project. The use of 1,830 acre-
feet per year of recycled water may offset the use of between 500 and 1,000 acre-feet per year
of existing potable water. The remainder could offset private groundwater use or new demands
for non-potable water. Targeted large volume users of recycled water include Cal Poly, City
and County parks, the City golf course, local schools, State of California, Department of
Transportation, and areas to be developed within the City.
City of San Luis Obispo 39
Urban Water Management Pi..
Proposed Distribution.System
The Water Reuse Project will construct a distribution system to deliver recycled water to large
volume customers throughout San Luis Obispo. The system will be designed for future
expansion to serve small volume users, when it becomes economically feasible to do so.
Components of the distribution system will include pump stations, -water storage facilities,
treatment equipment, pipelines, and valves.
A portion of the recycled water will be discharged to San Luis Obispo Creek to support riparian
habitat. The remainder will enter the recycled water distribution system to be delivered to
customers. A pump station located near the storage pond at the Water Reclamation Facility will
pressurize the distribution system. Booster pumps are needed to provide the proper pressure
throughout the City. Initial planning calls for them to be located near the intersection of
Industrial Way and Sacramento Drive, and at the Emerson School site. Approximately 8-1/2
miles of new pipeline will be installed and approximately 2-1/2 miles of abandoned petroleum
pipelines will be converted to recycled water use. Storage will be provided by expanding the
sedimentation ponds along Highway 101 and reactivating abandoned Reservoir lA on Fox
Hollow Road. A single six acre pond will be eight feet deep. The top two feet will provide 3.9
million gallons of short term storage without draining the pond. Reservoir IA, a concrete lined,
covered storage basin that was built in 1.910, will be repaired to provide an additional 5.0
million gallons of storage.
Recycled water will be delivered to customers.through a service meter near their property line.
Customers will provide and install the necessary facilities to distribute the recycled water
throughout their properties. Each user will install safety devices to ensure the proper use of
recycled water. The required safety features may include approved backflow prevention devices,
new plumbing to separate potable water from recycled water, and 'modification to irrigation
systems to prevent over-spray and over-watering.
Operation and Maintenance
The City's Wastewater Division will operate the Water Reclamation Facility and the water reuse
pumps and filters located at the Water Reclamation Facility. The City's Water Division will
operate and maintain the recycled water distribution system.
The City will monitor the customer's compliance with the rules and regulations established for
the.safe use of recycled water.
Future Development Areas
Recycled water may be used for irrigation of residential yard's with dual plumbing. It is unlikely
that it will ever be economical to install the distribution system and.separate plumbing for use
of recycled water in older.residential areas. Recycled water may be:used in commercial and
industrial facilities for toilet flushing, cooling and rinse water, car washing, concrete mixing,
boiler water, and other uses permitted for "Disinfected Tertiary Reclaimed Water".
40 City of'San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Peau
The most cost effective use of recycled water will be in new construction and development
where the dual distribution and plumbing systems can be built as an integral part of the original
construction. The Water Reuse Project is configured to be able to serve those areas identified
in the General Plan Land Use Element as the principle expansion areas.
If recycled water is provided to downstream agriculture outside the city limits, it should be
delivered via a pipeline. The water could be metered for accurate billing, environmental
degradation would be lessened by keeping nutrients out of the creek, and the potential for water
theft would be minimized. Before water is delivered to downstream users, consideration should
be given to setting a termination date for each service to prevent the City from becoming
obligated to continue such services outside the City in perpetuity.
Project Schedule
The schedule for the water reuse project is as follows:
Activity Date
*Complete project CEQA review Jan 1995
eComplete project engineering report March 1995
•Complete project design Sept 1995
•Complete project construction Dec 1996
Staffing Evaluation
It is proposed that the Water Distribution Maintenance and Customer Service Division be
responsible for the recycled water distribution system. Until agreements are reached for
supplying recycled water to various areas of the City, it is impossible to determine the level of
staffing which will be required to maintain the system and read the water meters. Staff will
return to Council at a future date to evaluate the options.
City of San Luis Obispo 41
Urban Water Management Pi,--
3.4.
►,_3.4 WATER DEMAND MANAGEMENT
Introduction
Water demand management practices and technology have advanced .significantly in the last
several years in reaction to the drought of 1986-1991. Historically, water demand management
was viewed as an emergency response to extreme water shortage situations. As demand for
water resources increase due to growing population and agricultural needs, the importance of
using our water wisely and efficiently is imperative to assure adequate, reliable water supplies
in the future.
Backeround
Water demand management, or water conservation, was first referenced as a part of the City's
water management policy in the 1973 General Plan. In 1985, the City Annual Water
Operational Plan policy formally established water demand management as a means to extend
water supplies during projected water shortages. From 1988 (when an aggressive water
conservation program was implemented) to October 1993, approximately 14,400 acre-feet of
water savings can be attributed to the water efficiency programs implemented during that period.
In 1990, the City endorsed a multi-source water plan in an attempt to solve both short-term
water shortages and establish long=term solutions to the City's water needs. Because of the
difficulty in developing new water supply projects, there has been a philosophical shift in
perception of water demand management as crisis management vehicle in 1985 to a water supply
alternative for the future.
Water Demand Management Program.Direction
In September 1991, the Council approved signing the "Memorandum of Understanding" (MOU)
regarding water conservation and the implementation of the "Best Management Practices"
(BMP's). The BMP's are listed in Appendix V. This signifies a minimum ten year commitment
to implement and evaluate the water efficiency measures presented in the MOU.
Using the.BMP's as a.road map for future water demand management program implementation,
a balanced program of providing information and assistance to the City's water customers is
necessary to maintain the water use reductions levels required to increase the reliability of the
City's water supplies. Many valuable studies which the City could not afford to perform are
being funded and administered by the BMP signatory group, the California Urban Water
Conservation Council. These studies will have a direct benefit to the City by providing a
method to analyze water conservation programs for cost effectiveness and to quantify reliable
savings associated with specific programs.
42 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Pl.._
3.5 OTHER SUPPLEMENTAL WATER SUPPLY PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
3.5.1 DESALINATION
Backgrourid
In May 1990, the City was faced with the prospect of reaching minimum pool in both of its
surface water supply sources within an 18 to 20 month period. . In response to the crisis, the
City embarked on a short term desalination feasibility investigation. The consulting firm of
James Montgomery Engineers was hired to prepare a study which evaluated the various
desalination methods, site options,joint venture opportunities, and financing. The project also
had termination or "Go/No-Go" date established after the 1990/91 rainy season to determine if
a change in direction was warranted due to any change in water storage resulting from winter
storms. The preliminary analysis concluded that 3,000 acre-feet per year of desalted water could
be provided by using reverse osmosis technology which was considered the most cost effective
technology at that time to meet the City's needs. The project capital cost was estimated to be
$19.5 million. The recommendation was based on capital costs, operation and maintenance
costs, decommissioning costs, aesthetics and environmental concerns. Due to the limited time
available to site the facility and build the necessary infrastructure, a tentative agreement with
PG&E was reached to locate the short-term facility at the Morro Bay power plant utilizing their
seawater intake and outfall facilities.
The "Miracle March" rains of 1991 provided adequate runoff and subsequent increased water
storage in the City's reservoirs to allow termination of the desalination project. The City
Council officially directed staff to discontinue the project on April 16, 1991.
Future Desalination Water Supply Project
Using desalted water as a future supply water source will have to be investigated independently
of the past research and study projects. Because the previously discussed desalination endeavor
was planned to be a short term water supply to meet a crisis situation, the cost analysis,
location, environmental review, and technological information would have to be reevaluated for
a long term project.
Desalination is a viable technology which is not rainfall dependent. The major disadvantages
of desalination are the cost, potential environmental degradation, and energy demand. When
compared to existing water supplies and other future water supply options under consideration,
desalted water is significantly more expensive at this point in time. Desalination may be a water
supply consideration in the future if other water supply project currently under review are not
accomplished. Also, advances in desalination technology in the future may reduce the costs to
a more acceptable level when compared to the cost of other water supply sources.
3.5.2 CLOUD SEEDING
The City of San Luis Obispo activated a three year cloud seeding program in January 1991 in
response to the continuing drought and limited surface water supplies at Salinas reservoir. The
City of San Luis Obispo 43
Urban Water Management Pi_
program "targeted" the Salinas and Lopez Reservoir watersheds, and the County of San Luis
Obispo paid their prorata share of the total cost for the cloud seeding program. The City's
participation the program ended in January 1993, when the Salinas Reservoir filled to capacity
and began spilling.
Evaluations of each year's cloud seeding program were completed following each winter season.
Estimates of increased precipitation ranged from 11% to 14% for the Salinas and Lopez
Reservoir watersheds. These were substantial increases and proved to be a cost-effective means
of enhancing runoff during periods when Salinas Reservoir or Lopez lake water levels are low.
Salinas Reservoir's watershed runoff characteristics are favorable for producing significant runoff
during normal rain. seasons. Therefore, cloud seeding is not viewed as an annual program but
as a program that the Council may approve following below normal rainfall years and/or periods
when significant storage is available in Salinas Reservoir to capture additional runoff. Staff will
evaluate the need for a cloud seeding program following each year's rainfall season and provide
a recommendation to Council for the next year's winter season as part of the annual Water
Operation Plan (brought to Council in the spring of each year).
3.5.3 SALINAS TO WHALE ROCK TRANSFER
The idea of transferring water which would otherwise spill downstream from Salinas reservoir
to Whale Rock Reservoir was evaluated by staff and presented to Council in 1993. Since Salinas
Reservoir spills frequently in contrast to Whale Rock Reservoir, the potential exists to transfer
significant quantities of Salinas Reservoir water(which would otherwise overtop the Salinas dam
spillway and flow downstream) to Whale Rock Reservoir. The analysis revealed numerous
obstacles and limitations, and Council directed staff to not proceed at this time with further
studies relative to this project.
3.5.4 GROUNDWATER RECHARGE
Groundwater recharge using tertiary treated reclaimed water may be a future water supply
alternative. The groundwater basin from which the City pumps water is relatively small and
recharges quickly following average rainfall periods. Because of the limited storage capacity
and rapid recharge, there may be limited opportunities for recharge of the groundwater basin.
It may be possible in the future to develop a groundwater recharge system using reclaimed water
produced at the Water Reclamation Facility for potable water uses. The State Department of
Health Services have very stringent regulations governing such non-potable water recharge
projects. An extensive analysis and study evaluating costs, water recharge potential, and
potential storage or injection sites will be required before pursuing such a project.
44 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Pla..
CHAPTER 4
WATER OPERATIONAL PROGRAMS
WATER OPERATIONS
Polfa
The City shall sustain city-wide water efficiency programs and strive to provide an adequate
supply of high quality water which
■ meets all Federal and State standards;
■ provides uninterrupted water flow at sufficient pressures;
■ provides fire protection.
The City shall allocate funding to meet the goals and objectives presented in this chapter (also
see Chapter 5). The City should strive to replace aging water lines at the annual rate of 2% of
the replacement value of the water distribution system.
Introduction
The City has depended on imported water supplies from Salinas reservoir since 1944, Whale
Rock reservoir since 1961, and limited local groundwater sources since 1989. Figure 3 shows
the City's reservoir water supplies and delivery system. This chapter will describe the existing
water system, operation and maintenance procedures, and identify current and future system
deficiencies.
4.1 WATER TREATMENT
The City currently receives its water from three sources, Salinas Reservoir, Whale Rock
Reservoir, and groundwater. Over the past twenty years, surface water treatment and
groundwater treatment standards and regulations have become more stringent. With the
enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) in 1974, Congress authorized the federal
government to establish national drinking water regulations. Since that time, many amendments
have been made to the act which require additional monitoring and thereby increased operational
costs. The following sections discuss the impacts of the current regulations on the City's water
treatment facilities and potential impacts of any foreseeable amendments to the current
regulations.
City of San Luis Obispo 45
Urban Water Management Pio,.
•r Y'
' Whale Rock '
AT SCADERO
•
_ `••�
i •��l w.�
.
Reservoir ..... n3
__—r,:�v •s l' ; •�^ter"' r•�...7...� ` ,. ... r„•�,.. w.n, .�a
AN
MAI • . .... ENKN •r,• ..
Whale Rock Line
M !•.f. •.
._.•.� , .. ....... •:- , �.. • 111111 -Army Line '
�r �,, ,, � _ , . •� ;�;' N;lG1
1,\; .� ,•.. .,` .yam 1
MORRO BAY C- •rr nMfrv, til• qq. �, p
.�.a r. :•o:n..... - •. , _ T.
t Y\�
••• r.�•.N E MAK4..Rl/..
\,IIi1Y0aD'... • ,r,.:.Irl ••�o�w. r a„ _ `, .AK.
/
PAR C..
0033 �' ~�'`. .•Y,�, Treatment r.••.vrr•101 l ,.r:. ".••i••s•r . ; �"'•"'....
_4 Salinas
y r• 'M 4 Salinas
PlantReservoir
:�� w .nw .n,' rr rlwn sr � n••r.rr• �L �• 1
...,.,. ,% �.. .r r_.r:> C1. A LUIS OBISPO •�
` .....,w.Mur ry � • ` �E / �—_. __._._.
Figure 3 CITY'S WATER SUPPLY AND CONVEYANCE SYSTEM
4.1.1 SURFACE WATER
Background
The City of San Luis Obispo depends on surface water to meet most of its water requirements.
The Salinas Reservoir, located nine miles southeast of the community of Santa Margarita, has
been providing water to the City since 1944 and Whale Rock Reservoir, located one-half mile
east of the town of Cayucos, has been a water source since 1961. Both water supplies are
considered to be of high quality.
Existing Surface Water Treatment Facility
The existing water treatment plant is located on Stenner Creek Road, northwest of the Cal Poly
campus. The facility was constructed in 1964 to provide treatment of surface water from Salinas
and Whale Rock Reservoirs. The plant was originally designed to treat up to eight million
gallons per day (mgd). In 1977, the plant was upgraded to provide 11.5 mgd of treatment
capacity but has actually treated up to 12 mgd for limited periods during peak water demands.
The water treatment plant is a conventional plant that includes coagulation, flocculation,
sedimentation, filtration, and disinfection. Currently, the plant uses chlorine as the primary
46 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management F.__.
disinfectant. The plant has operated successfully for nearly 30 years with only minor
modifications.
Surface Water Treatment Regulation
Since the existing water treatment plant was built, the Safe Drinking Water Act was adopted and
was significantly amended. The 1986 amendments are extremely broad in scope and require
implementation of new regulations by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The Safe
Drinking Water Act also required the Environmental Protection Agency to specify criteria under
which filtration is required as a treatment technique for surface supplies. On June 29, 1989,
the Environmental Protection Agency issued the Surface Water Treatment Rule which defines
the standards for surface water treatment and has specific compliance deadlines.
The purpose of the regulation is to protect the public, as much as possible, from waterborne
diseases. Waterborne.diseases, most notably Giardia lamblia, Cryptosporidium, and Legionella,
are most commonly transmitted by surface water contamination. For the City of San Luis
Obispo, the most significant issue is the regulation aimed at reducing the formation of
disinfection by products, specifically trihalomethanes ("THM's"), which are a group of
compounds formed during disinfection by the reaction of chlorine with naturally occurring
organics. While the City has consistently met the current 100 micrograms-per-liter limit, there
have been occasional instances in which the standard has been exceeded due to the high organic
content of Salinas Reservoir water during certain times of the year. The new regulations require
increased chlorine contact times which will cause the THM levels to exceed the regulations. It
is anticipated that the new regulations will reduce the allowable level for THM's in the future.
Ozone Water Treatment Facility
To comply with the current standards for THM's, meet anticipated future water quality
standards, and increase water treatment operational efficiency, the City is upgrading the water
treatment facility to use ozone as the primary disinfectant instead of chlorine. The use of ozone
provides enhanced disinfection capability to meet federal and state requirements but will not
form chlorinated by-products such as trihalomethanes. When completed (projected-July 1994,)
the plant also will produce water free of objectionable taste and odor associated with algae
blooms at Salinas Reservoir and meet all current as well as anticipated regulations.
The upgraded project will increase the capacity of the plant from 11.5 million gallons per day
to 16.0 million gallons per day. This is accomplished through increased filter efficiency and the
ability to treat Whale Rock Reservoir water without using the sedimentation process. The
expanded capacity is sufficient to meet projected water demand at full buildout under the General
Plan.
City of San Luis Obispo 47
Urban Water Management Pi...
4.1.2 GROUNDWATER
Background
Prior to 1986, most groundwater in the San Luis Obispo area was used by agriculture with very
little used for domestic consumption. With the onset of the drought in 1986, resulting in
decreasing surface water supplies, the City activated groundwater wells in 1989 to meet the
City's water demand.
Groundwater Quality and Treatment Regulations
Groundwater quality requirements, as with surface water, are governed by the SDWA. Like
surface water, groundwater must meet the standards set in the Safe Drinking Water Act. Water
quality analysis in 1989 indicated that advanced treatment was needed on the now
decommissioned Dalidio and Auto Park Way wells due to unacceptable levels of
Tetrachloroethylene (PCE). Carbon absorption units were placed on each well to provide
necessary treatment, and were granted approval for domestic consumption by the State of
California, Department of Health Services.
In November 1992, nitrate levels in the Auto Park Way well exceeded State standards, so the
well was taken out of service. The well located near Denny's Restaurant adjacent to Los Osos
Valley Road (referred to as the "Denny's well") experienced a similar increase in nitrate levels
and was taken off-line in June 1993. Treatment alternatives for nitrate removal will be
recommended to Council during 1994. The Auto Park Way well will be the focus for potential
treatment and reactivation because of its record of providing a reliable yield of water over an
extended time period (even during the recent drought).
4.1.3 POSSIBLE FUTURE REGULATORY CHANGES
As analytical techniques allow for lower levels of regulated water contaminants to be detected
and new contaminants are added to the regulatory list issued by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency and state regulatory agencies, there may be impacts on the City's water
treatment operations. While the Stenner Canyon Water Treatment Plant upgrade was designed
to meet current and anticipated water treatment standards, future regulations may require
additional modifications, depending on the action levels adopted by the federal and state
regulatory agencies. The following are possible regulatory changes which may influence water
treatment plant operations:
■ Regulation of total organic carbon Could require optimizing coagulation, which would
add an acid-feed system to the treatment process.
■ Regulation of THM sub-species. Chlorinated bromides would most likely be targeted,
which would not necessarily be a problem unless the action level is, extremely low.
48 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Pi,...
■ Regulation of hypochlorites. Chlorates caused by the decomposition of hypochlorites
solution may require coolers to be installed on holding tanks to stabilize temperature inside
the tanks. This is a requirement now being considered by the State.
■ Lowering of the THM allowable levels. Could require changing from hypochlorite to
chloramines for final disinfection.
The effect of any of the potential regulations on the City's treatment operations is dependent on
the action level adopted. More technical and complicated processes may require training or
hiring of personnel skilled in the maintenance of sophisticated electronic equipment and
knowledgeable in telemetry and computer programming. This will be addressed in the future,
if necessary.
4.1.4 STAFFING EVALUATION
California law requires certification of all water treatment plant operators. There are five
certification levels with Grade V being the highest. Because of the size or output capabilities
of the City's water treatment facility, the plant supervisor must be a Grade V.
The following is a list of the current water treatment staff by level of certification:
Grade V - 1 (Water. Treatment Plant Supervisor)
Grade IV - 2
Grade III - 3
Grade II - 1
Lab Tech - 1 (Grade IV certification but not an operator)
TOTAL 8
This level and qualification of staffing meets both the legal standards mandated by the State and
the operational requirements of the water treatment facility. As the operation and monitoring
requirements become more sophisticated, a review of the staffing needs may be required.
City of San Luis Obispo 49
Urban Water Management Pio
4.2 WATER DISTRIBUTION
Introduction
The water distribution system delivers potable water to approximately 12,500 metered
customers. The goals of the program are to provide uninterrupted water flow at adequate
pressures, to meet all fire and domestic flow requirements, and to minimize system water loss
due to leakage. In order to accomplish these goals, the water distribution program has seven
major work objectives. They are as follows:
■ Pump station and tank maintenance
■ Water main maintenance and repair
■ Water service installation and service renewal
■ Fire hydrant installation
■ Fire hydrant maintenance
■ Cross connection control
■ Underground Service Alert (USA) markouts
Because of the geographic setting of San Luis Obispo, the water distribution system is a very
complex structure of pipes, pumps, storage tanks, and pressure reducing valves.
4.2.1 SYSTEM DFSCRUMON
The water distribution program delivers Po.� _I ,m„„ -
potable water from the water treatment
plant and wells to customers and fire
�'_.N... S1. Z.
hydrants via three storage reservoirs, six
pump stations, eight water tanks, and
approximately 150 miles of water mains.
It is unlikely this basic distribution �K°"" Z""
pattern will change, since the water
treatment plant will continue to be the
source of treated water for the
principal
City. i
GRAVITY PUMPED
Growth within the City has placed``' \�\ DELIVERY DELIVERY
increased demands on the water `.
distribution system. Additionally, many ,------- i
pipes throughout the City are over 100
years old, and do not provide adequate
capacity to meet current fire-flow Figure 4 PRESSURE ZONES
requirements. Even without growth or
fire protection requirements, aging pipes must be replaced to avoid major service disruptions and
leaks due to deterioration. Historically, the City has not sufficiently funded distribution system
replacement to a level that ensures replacement prior to the end of its expected service life.
50 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Pt.„
There are approximately 150 miles of water distribution pipelines throughout the City. The
engineering estimate for the life expectancy of these facilities is 50 years. Complete replacement
within the term of life expectancy would require that the City replace an average of 2% of the
system infrastructure each year.
Pressure Zones
Figure 4 illustrates the distribution system's pressure zones. The water delivered from the
treatment plant is split into two main distribution networks. About 52% flows into the City by
gravity and the other 48% is pumped to a storage reservoir at a higher elevation and then flows
into the various service areas by gravity and through pressure reducing valves (PRV's). The
most apparent strain is in the pumped delivery system. This will be discussed in more detail in
the system evaluation section.
Since electrical power for
pumping water is a major expense, Treatment Plant ♦Stenner Canyon
a goal is to develop a system
which minimizes pumping. Ferrini♦
The goal of the water supply Highland 4 / &Reservoir No.I
system is to deliver water at
pressures between 40 pounds per Slack St.
square inch and 80 pounds per Serra —i
square inch at the customer's
meter without using a pressure
reducing valve on the pipe Bishop
connecting the water main to the
meter. This pressure range will Terrace Hill
meet the needs of most irrigation l
sprinklers and other uses, and
provide adequate pressure for fire a
sprinkler systems. Pressure zones '
are established in the distribution
Edna
system to maintain these pressure Saddle
ranges. The City currently has 15
pressure zones divided between Capacity Elevation
the gravity and pumped delivery Location in Base Surface
systems. Treatment Plant Wet Well 4.00 406 431.5
Stenner Canyon Res.2 7.50 536 557.0
Reservoir 1 7.50 422 433.0
Water Storage Facilities Slack Street Tank 0.07 535 555.0
Highland Tank 0.03 S47 544.0
Semana Tank 0.10 542 564.5
Bishop Tank 0.10 533 556.0
Water storage facilities are Terrace Hill Tank 0.75 386 415.0
necessary to provide water during Edna Saddle rank 4.00 320 345.0
peak demand periods and Ferrini Tank 0.16 569 584.0
emergency situations such as fires. TOTAL 24.21
The City has ten water storage Figure 5 STORAGE FACILITIES
City of San Luis Obispo 51
Urban Water Management Ph..
facilities, six of which are steel storage tanks ranging in size from .07 to 4 million gallons, three
concrete facilities with a capacity of.03 to 7.5 million gallons, and one hydropneumatic station.
The combined storage capacity is 24.21 million gallons. The holding capacity of the various
facilities and tank locations throughout the City are shown in Figure 5.
Water Transmission System
Parts of the City's water transmission system are over 100 years old. Most of the pipes are
made of cast iron. Other pipes are made of asbestos cement (located primarily in the Laguna
Lake area), or, since the mid-1970's, PVC. Water pipes serve two basic functions. The larger
pipes or transmission mains move large volumes of water from one portion of the City to
another. They range in size from 12 inches to 30 inches. The smaller pipes or distribution
mains are to distribute water within a local area and deliver it to each property in the City.
They range in size from 2 inches (in the older portions of the City) to 12 inches. The current
minimum standard is 8 inches for distribution mains.
Water from the water treatment plant in Stenner Canyon is transported through a 30 inch
transmission line 3,500 feet to the transfer pumps .(located on Stenner Canyon Road). The
transfer pumps take approximately 48% of the water, increase the pressure, and then provide
water to Stenner Canyon Reservoir, Cal Poly, and other portions of the City, generally north
and east of the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks. From the transfer pumps, there are two 24
inch transmission lines that move water about one mile to the city limits. One pipe is the high
pressure line from the transfer pumps and the other pipe has lower pressure supplied directly
from the water treatment plant's clear well. Figure 6 shows a simplified schematic of the water
transmission system.
B.."D Taft
EXISTING
O
MGo _
Rar.Rv tl
rely/ T.pMrwl
MOM
oe.rnto.w
Emm Some
Figure 6 WATER TRANSMISSION SCHEMATIC
52 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Pla.
Fire Protection System
Fire protection is one of the most important services the City provides to its residents. The fire
protection system is a network of 1,661 public hydrants and 160 private hydrants.
The Las Pilitas fire in 1985 nearly exceeded the City's capability to supply sufficient water for
fire suppression. The Johnson Avenue and Orcutt Road area are the weakest areas for
emergency water supply, because less than 3.5% of the total storage is in this area and our
delivery from the distribution system is limited to about 2,000 gallons a minute. The
alternatives for improving this situation are to increase the water storage capacity in that area
or increase the capacity of the transmission delivery system. Another area of concern is in the
Slack Street and San Luis Drive neighborhoods. Due to existing water main easements and
location of these mains in relationship to fire hydrants, fire protection capabilities are not
adequate. An alternative is to relocate the water mains in City right-of-ways and re-connect
customer service lines to the new mains.
Fire flows can now be met in all of the other gravity zones. There are local distribution
problems within all zones that will be remedied by removal of deteriorated and undersized pipes
as part of the ongoing capital replacement program.
4.2.2 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE STAFFING EVALUATION
In order to retain a reliable water distribution system, a routine maintenance program is
essential. The following section discusses the components of a preventative maintenance
program necessary to minimize water service disruption and prolong system service life.
Preventative Maintenance Components
■ Systemwide Mainline Valve Exercise Maintenance
A comprehensive mainline valve exercise program is essential as it ensures proper operation of
valves and minimal disruption to water customers during an emergency shutdown. This program
also identifies problem areas such as broken valves, broken operating nuts, buried gatewells, and
misaligned access sleeves. Identified problem areas can then be scheduled for repair or
replacement which will minimize future distribution problems. In addition, a valve exercise
program assures that fire hydrants can be isolated for maintenance and repair.
■ Pump Station Maintenance
Since electrical and mechanical pumping equipment consists of many moving parts that are
subject to wear, they require a comprehensive preventative maintenance program to prolong their
useful life and avoid costly breakdowns. Currently, staff performs weekly inspections of the five
pumping facilities. Corrective maintenance is performed as needed.
City of San Luis Obispo 53
Urban Water Management Pla..
■ Water Storage Tank Inspection and Maintenance
The water storage tanks are a very important component of the water distribution system. As
a result of the storage facilities, the system's flow and pressures are improved and stabilized to
better serve the customers within a storage facility's zone. Additionally, these supplies serve
as a reserve for,emergencies such as fire suppression and power outages. Regular inspections
and preventative maintenance are necessary to protect the City's investment in these facilities.
This includes regularly-scheduled inspections and cleaning of probes and relays, paint and
protective coatings, facility security systems, and maintenance of access roads and sites.
■ Service Line Change-Out Program
The service line (from the water main to the customer water meter) change-out program is
currently a reactive program due to the high rate of service line failures. The City's service
lines consist of one of five types of materials: copper, polyethylene, polybutylene, lead, and
galvanized pipe. Three of the materials, polybutylene, galvanized iron and lead, have been
determined to be inferior due to their high failure rate and potential health risk. These types of
lines are replaced upon their discovery or failure and account for 45% of the workload of the
water distribution staff. A capital replacement program which would replace large numbers of
services may be necessary in the future if the failure rate increases significantly.
■ Pressure Reducing Valve Maintenance Program
Pressure reducing valves (PRV's) are necessary to maintain acceptable pressure levels in both
low lying and higher elevation areas of the City. Pressure reducing valves reduce plumbing
failures and system leakage in areas that would otherwise experience high pressure. There are
14 PRV's in the City which should be inspected and tested annually, and rebuilt periodically as
part of a PRV maintenance program. Only corrective maintenance is currently performed.
■ Fre Hydrants
To ensure that fire hydrants operate correctly when needed, annual testing, maintenance, and
repair should be performed. It is the responsibility of the water distribution staff to perform all
maintenance, repairs, and hydrant replacement as needed. Preventative maintenance is on a
limited basis. Periodic flow testing is performed by the Fire Department.
Operation and Maintenance Summary
The preventative maintenance program goals are only being partially accomplished at this time
due to the lack of available staff time to perform the various program components. This is a
result of an aging distribution system which requires a significant amount of emergency repair
coupled with an increase in system size (additional miles of pipeline). The workload analysis
presented in Appendix IV indicates that 60% of the staff's time is spent responding to system
failures in either service or main lines.
54 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Pi_
4.2.3 WATER DISTRIBUTION INFRASTRUCTURE EVALUATION
In 1992, the City obtained a water system computer modeling program entitled Cybernet.
Cybernet is a graphic modeling program capable of simulating the City's entire water
distribution system. As staff enters water system data, a model of the entire system is being
constructed to analyze necessary system improvements. Until that process is completed, staff
is relying on experience, records, and water distribution crew knowledge to evaluate the system.
Priority Areas
This section identifies specific existing deficiencies in the water distribution system. These
deficiencies are considered high priorities and could require funding beyond the recommended
capital improvement project program expenditures.
The following is a description of the identified problem area and the recommended solution:
■ Alrita Pump Station
Problem - The current system consists of a hydro-pneumatic pump that serves 11 customers.
Other customers, immediately outside of the Alrita Zone, have inadequate water pressure.
Solution - Enlarge and raise in elevation the Bishop tank to serve a larger pressure zone. The
Bishop zone is currently too large for the size of the existing storage facility. The existing
80,000 gallon tank should be replaced with a 250,000 gallon tank. This would allow the City
to eliminate the inefficient, uneconomical Alrita hydro-pneumatic pumping station. This would
also increase the fire protection capability of the Bishop tank pressure zone.
■ Highland Zone
Problem - The Highland Tank is undersized for the area it serves. The tank is also too low,
resulting in inadequate pressure for some residences.
Solution- The ideal solution would involve the construction of a new water tank at an elevation
adequate to eliminate the private booster pumps necessary for some customers. The construction
of a new water tank would be costly. Another alternative would involve the construction of a
water line from the Ferrini Tank to the end of Oakridge Drive. This would eliminate the
Highland Tank and the Highland Zone. The area served by the Highland Tank would become
part of the Ferrini zone. About 20 feet of additional head would be experienced in the Highland
Zone. Some private boosters would still be necessary, but the higher head would result in
decreased pumping costs for the residences requiring boosters. The City would save
maintenance cost by eliminating the Fel-mar Pumping Station, which serves the Highland Tank.
City of San Luis Obispo 55
Urban Water Management Pla..
■ Laguna Lake Area (west of Los Osos Valley Road)
Problem-The area has inadequate water pressure resulting from the distance to the Edna Saddle
Tank and the size of the Edna Zone.
Solution - A new transmission main may be necessary to increase water availability in the
Laguna Lake area. A main could extend from the 20-inch line in the intersection of South
Higuera and Prado Road or could extend down Foothill Boulevard to Los Osos Valley Road.
Another alternative would involve the construction of a new water storage tank in the Laguna
Lake area.
■ Slack Street/San Luis Drive Areas
Problem - Water mains were originally constructed in easements through the back yards of the
properties in the area. Fire hydrant density is inadequate, reading water meters is difficult, and
maintenance on the facilities is nearly impossible.
Solution - The water lines should be relocated to the public streets in front of the residences.
The services should also be changed over to the front of each house.
4.2.4 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AREAS
It is estimated that the water distribution system size will increase by approximately 15% or
about 45 miles under the adopted General Plan, which is currently being updated. It is
important to note this does not include annexation of the Airport area. In addition, the proposed
reclaimed water distribution system, to be maintained by the water distribution staff, will add
roughly 11 miles of water line depending on the area served by reclaimed water. Also,
additional pumping stations, water storage, and other distribution facilities may be required.
4.2.5 STAFFING EVALUATION
A comprehensive workload analysis has been performed on the water distribution and customer
service sections using work logs recorded during the past three years. The analysis includes
both sections because of the overlap in duties and job assistance. There are five water
distribution maintenance workers, three customer service representatives, and one supervisor.
The results of the workload analysis are presented in Appendix IV.
As indicated, the current water distribution staff workload is limited to primarily corrective
maintenance because of the increases in the distribution system's size and age. A preventative
maintenance program will add to the reliability of the water system and potentially extend the
service life of the infrastructure, thus reducing future costs. To establish a viable preventative
maintenance program, an evaluation has been prepared which addresses each component of the
program and estimates the time required to perform the various tasks. The evaluation indicates
that a minimum of two additional staff will be required to implement a cost effective
56 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Pi.-
preventative maintenance program. The recommended increase in staffing will be presented to
Council as part of the 1995-97 Financial Plan.
The workload analysis does not take into account future growth in the water delivery system or
the maintenance of the proposed water reclamation system. Those additional staffing
requirements will be analyzed when more complete water system information is available.
City of San Luis Obispo 57
Urban Water-Management Ply..
4.3 WATER CUSTOMER.SERVICE
Introduction
The water customer service program is responsible for accurately measuring water delivered
through the distribution system to the City's 12,500 customers. The following are the major
goals for this section: 1) to accurately measure the amount of water which passes through the
customer water meters, and 2) to schedule and perform meter reads which will-generate timely
and regular water billings. To accomplish these goals, the program has three major objectives.
They are as follows:
■ Water Meter Reading. Read approximately 6,250 water meters each month, investigate
abnormal readings (high and low), start and stop water service, and maintain access towater
meters.
■ Meter replacement and maintenance. Replace all obsolete meters over a seven year period
to conserve water and accurately measure water use for billing purposes; replace meters on a
20 year replacement schedule to ensure proper operation, and repair meter leaks as necessary.
■ Compound meter testing and repair. Maintain large commercial meters and contract
services for the testing and repair on a four-year schedule.
4.3.1 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION AND EVALUATION
The Water customer service program is responsible for the following:
■ Read approximately 6,250 water meters monthly as part of the City's bimonthly billing
process
■ Repair water meter leaks
■ Replace obsolete, old and damaged water meters
■ Test and repair of compound meters
■ Starting and discontinue water service (turn-on and offs)
■ Discontinue and restore service for non-payment
Appendix IV provides the actual workload indicators in these areas for.the fiscal years
1991=92 and 1992-93.
The program is achieving the work objectives with the assistance of the water distribution
maintenance staff during peak work load periods.
4.3.2 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AREAS
Under the adopted General Plan, itis estimated there will be an increase of approximately 23%
in the number of water meters. It is importantto note that the current General Plan does not
include the airport area. Depending on the annexation size and adopted development.plan for
58 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Pi�
that area, an additional increase of 2% to 5% could be anticipated. Given this assumption in
system growth, it can be projected that the number of water meters in the City will increase by
approximately 2,875 to 3,500 when General Plan build-out is achieved.
4.3.3 STAFFING EVALUATION
Water customer service is staffed by three full-time employees. Assistance on an "as needed"
basis is provided by the water distribution maintenance crew. In addition, customer service
personnel are required to perform standby duties on a rotating basis and respond to any water
emergency occurring during off duty hours. This means customer service personnel must be
fully trained and qualified to perform the same job functions as the water distribution
maintenance staff. A combined workload analysis is presented in Appendix IV.
As indicated, a large percentage of time is spent on scheduled meter reads (25%), but most of
their time is spent in other areas, such as establishing or disconnecting water service and
corrective maintenance. The overlap and assistance provided by the water distribution
maintenance crew is also identified in the analysis. Again, this figure is derived from a three
year average. Assistance is needed mostly during peak periods of start or stop service requests
(coinciding with the beginning and end of Cal Poly's quarters), substituting during vacations or
illness, and when reading large water meter routes.
The cross-over of staffing during peak workload periods and emergency situations is
accomplishing the Customer Service Program goals and objectives. Based on the estimated
increase in the number of water meters as the City annexes areas within the Urban reserve line,
additional staffing will be required. As areas are annexed, an analysis of the staffing impacts
will be performed and a recommendation presented to Council.
City of San Luis Obispo 59
Urban Water Management Pi_..
4.4 TELEMETRY
Introduction
Telemetry literally means "measuring at a distance". Telemetry equipment includes the complete
measuring, transmitting, receiving, and recording data from an outlying location. The use of
a telemetry system will provide operational personnel with a mechanism to monitor and control
the entire water system from a central location and to obtain information at a moment's notice.
The information can either be sent by telephone lines or via radio signals. Through telemetry,
Water Division personnel can by command or by programming of the computer system,
automatically turn pumps on or off, change reservoir elevations, respond to abnormal or
emergency operations more expediently, and optimize pumping efficiency from a central
location. The result is a reduction in staff hours spent accomplishing all these tasks and the
reduction of vehicle trips to these outlying sites. In addition, State and Federal regulatory
standards require alarm procedures to detect process failures. The telemetry system monitors
the required processes, achieving compliance with the various regulations and ensuring reliability
of the water system.
4.4.1 SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
The Water Division telemetry system is a network of interconnected distributed process
controllers (DPC's) and personal computers. DPCs are similar to personal computers, but are
specifically designed to interconnect to sensing and control devices, and run programs written
in a distinctive computer language. Electronic sensing or measuring devices at a remote site
transmit data such as the level of water in a tank via radio signals to another site, such as a
pump station. At the pump station, a DPC uses the tank level data to decide when and which
pumps to operate. DPC's are capable of operating all types of industrial equipment from the
simple pump example to complex water and wastewater treatment processes, and are more
reliable and flexible than the old electromechanical or pneumatic control systems previously
utilized.
The Water Division telemetry system currently consists of twelve DPC's located at pump
stations, water storage tanks, water treatment plant, and various offices. These stations are
linked by a single network through two radio repeaters located at Tassajera Peak and seven radio
transceivers and eight radio links. Figure 7 identifies the current and proposed locations of the
telemetry system. During the 1993-95 Financial Plan period, the telemetry program will
complete phase 2 of the Utilities Telemetry project implementation at a cost of$30,000 in 1993-
94 and $20,000 in 1994-95. Planned projects will include upgrading obsolete and outdated
equipment and bringing the remaining water system components on line. When completed, the
water treatment plant, pump stations, water storage facilities and groundwater wells will be able
to coordinate operations, which will optimize the efficiency of the entire system. The system
would be invaluable during major catastrophic emergencies such as an earthquake or a major fire
like Las Pilitas.
60 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management PI,
E-1nenwtit
m mMs at
W"1?Trsohrem
Flard
WtoC
O-EM
TFW
t rlbnlkr In
WrebaRoW
k
WbOtor at
®6T FE61 WA �"•� W06 ❑ �DyrlhrllDn7 0 eTFiR FA\P HAD W� MLP 25PP A71 1 2 a 4 6 8 7
RNT HM HKT BSPT
1 1 1 2
Figure 7 WATER TELEMETRY SYSTEM
LEGEND: Italics denote locations to be added to telemetry system during 1993.95.
WRCK Whale Rock WTDC WTP Data Controller HLNT Highland Tank MDNV Madonna PRV
APMP A Pump Station CHEM Chemical Feed Room HLNP Highland Pump MTPW Mitchell Park Wel
BPMP B Pump Station TRNP Transfer Pump House MCLP McCollum Pump FS41N Fire Station 4 Wel
REST Reservoir 1 WDIS - Water Distribution SLKT Stack rank PBSW Pae Beach Waris
RES2 Reservoir 2 FRNT Ferrini Tank BSPT Bishop Tank APWW Autopark Way Wel
EDST Edna Saddle Tank FRNP Ferrini Pump BSPP Bishop Pump DENW Denny*&Wel
TRHT Transfer Pump BRSP Bressi Pump ALRP Alrita Pump
4.4.2 SYSTEM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE EVALUATION
The Water Division telemetry system program was implemented in 1989, initially serving Whale
Rock Reservoir and the water treatment plant. All design, installation, and programming is done
by the City's Telemetry and Instrumentation Technician with assistance provided by Water
Division field crews, with the exception of the new equipment being installed as part of the
water treatment plant upgrade project. The advantages of City personnel performing these duties
are the "hands on" experience gained by the field crews in actual operation of the system, more
immediate response to desired changes in the system function or programming, and the cost
savings versus using an outside consultant.
The system has been very reliable. Necessary repairs and adjustment performed at the existing
telemetry sites are executed by the telemetry technician. It is Utilities Department policy to
maintain a reserve supply of components. This enables the technician to immediately replace
disabled modules. Any defective equipment removed from the field that is not easily repaired
in the telemetry equipment repair facility is returned to the appropriate manufacturer for repair.
Every site is inspected at least twice annually and given a visual and functional examination.
This especially applies to the radio transmitters, to ensure that FCC licensing standards are
maintained. In addition, every DPC and operator interface computer has a set of program files
which are updated regularly.
City of San Luis Obispo 61
Urban Water Management Pty..
4.4.3STAFFING EVALUATION
The entire Utilities Department, Water and Wastewater, telemetry system is currently designed,
installed,programmed,and maintained by one Teleft etry and Instrumentation Technician. Based
on an evaluation of the current structure and.planned expansion of the telemetry system, this
level of staffing has been determined to be adequate for the needs of the current and completed
system. Some cross=training,of existing staff in all utilities sections will ensure adequate staffing
in the future.
62 _ City 0 San Luis Obispo .
Urban Water Management Pi..
4.5 WATER CONSERVATION
Introduction
In June 1985, the City Council adopted the Annual Water Operational Policy which established
a procedure to monitor the City's water supply situation. An integral component of the policy
was the establishment of a water demand management or conservation program aimed at
instituting corrective measures ahead of any projected water supply deficit to maintain a
dependable supply during critically dry periods. Water demand management has played an ever
increasing role in the overall water supply development and management strategies since 1985.
In 1990, the City adopted a multi-source water plan in an attempt to solve both short term water
shortages and meet the City's long term water needs. The importance of the implemented water
efficiency programs has become even more apparent as some of these planned water supply
projects have been rejected because of high cost or environmental impacts which could not be
mitigated. Because of the difficulty in developing new water supply projects, water conservation
is'being viewed more as a water supply alternative.
The primary goal of the water conservation program is to eliminate water waste by using water
more efficiently, which will postpone the need for additional supplies and reduce the amount of
water needed in the future. The specific objectives to achieve the goals of the water
conservation program are to:
■ Educate and inform water customers on short-term and long-term water supply conditions
and the importance of efficient water use;
■ Replace old plumbing hardware with water efficient plumbing hardware;
■ Evaluate water customer's indoor and outdoor water usage and provide specific
recommendations for improved efficiency;
■ Analyze water efficiency programs for cost effectiveness;
■ Develop new water efficiency programs;
■ Monitor and enforce water conservation municipal codes.
4.5.1 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Water conservation has two primary components, short-term and long-term water demand
management. Short-term activities address immediate water shortage situations caused by
prolonged below normal rainfall or disruption in water service due to a natural disaster such as
an earthquake. Long-term programs make permanent, long-term reductions in water demand
while minimally impacting customers' lifestyles.
Short Term Water Efficiency Program
Due to the drought and subsequent water shortage the City experienced from 1989 to 1992, the
short-term measures developed during that period (formalized in the City's Water Shortage
Contingency Plan) will be a model for any future water emergencies the City might face. The
City of San Luis Obispo 63
Urban Water Management Pla..
Water Shortage Contingency Plan was submitted to the State Department of Water Resources
in 1992.
State law (AB11) mandates that every water purveyor in California develop a water shortage
contingency plan. It is a compilation of all the monitoring systems the City has in place to
evaluate its water supply and any corrective actions necessary based on the water supply outlook.
As the City becomes more water efficient, it will become more difficult to achieve substantial
temporary reductions (mandatory conservation levels). Adjustments will have to be made in the
water shortage contingency plan to account for this increased water efficiency and to maintain
equity in the program administration.
Long Term Water Efficiency Program
Many of the public assistance programs implemented during mandatory rationing have proven
to be sound long-range water management practices. In September 1991, the City Council
approved and authorized the Mayor to sign the "Memorandum of Understanding" (MOU)
regarding urban water conservation and the implementation of the "Best Management Practices"
("BMP's").. The BMP's are comprised of sixteen water conservation measures.. The BMP's and
the implementation progress are listed in Appendix V. Most of the measures were implemented
during the water rationing period between 1989 and 1992. Appendix V lists the current
programs and services offered by the Water Conservation Office. The programs listed satisfy
the MOU and fulfill the annual reporting requirements outlined in the BMP's.
. 4.5.3 PROGRAM EVALUATION
The influence of the water rationing program and higher water rates make it difficult to identify
water savings from a specific program or service. As a signatory.agency to the MOU, the city
is a member of the California Urban Water Conservation Council (CUWCC). CUWCC is
currently working on several studies that will assist the member agencies in evaluating water
efficiency programs for water savings potential and cost effectiveness.
City water conservation staff completed a thorough analysis of the water savings potential from
water conservation technologies and programs in July 1994. That study is included in Appendix
V, as part of the description of City water conservation programs and services.
Three major components are included in the City's water efficiency strategies. These
components include the programs previously identified. The components are: 1) water
hardware retrofitting; 2) water auditing; and 3) public information and education.
■ Water Hardware Retrofitting. Studies to determine water savingsfrom residential and
commercial toilet retrofitting are being performed by member agencies to the CUWCC.
Preliminary results from the retrofit evaluations havesubstantiated that the assumptions used
to calculate potential water savings in the residential sector are solid. Commercial
retrofitting data is not yet available. . Table 4.5.3 summarizes the progress of toilet
retrofitting in the City through the Retrofit Rebate Program and the Water Offset Program
64 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Pl..
and examines the estimated water savings based on the preliminary data from the Retrofit
Rebate Program, specifically toilet retrofitting, and calculates a cost per acre-foot based on
the cost to the City versus the water saved. As indicated, the cost per acre-foot, as
compared to other supply sources, is cost effective.
Table 4.5.3
WATER SAVINGS THROUGH HARDWARE RETROFIT
Toilet Retro fit`Progress ';1993
Toilet Retrofit (Offset) Program 4,500 (estimated)
Retrofit Rebate Program 3,761 (actual)
Total 8,261
Number of toilets in the City (est) 32,000
Percent of City retrofitted 26%
Toilet Rebate;Program
,:Estimated water:.Saving$:and
Estimated Cost er AcreFoot
Number of toilets Retrofitted 3,761
Estimated Water Savings (range) 115 to 145 acre-feet per year
Total Program Cost (through 1993) $324,390
One time cost per acre-foot $2,240 to $2,820 '
Amortized cost per acre-foot (20 years) $224 to $282 •
` No ongoing operation or maintenance costs
Estimated Water Savings - 100% Retrofit 900 to 950 acre-feet per year
■ Water Auditing. Water auditing services, both indoor and irrigation, are a major element
to the water efficiency programs listed. In particular, irrigation auditing offers a significant
opportunity for water savings. Though current available data is not conclusive, preliminary
data estimates a 30% savings potential through proper scheduling and irrigation practices.
To date, approximately 500 water audits have been conducted.
■ Public Information and Education. Public information and education have historically
been the foundation of all the City's water efficiency programs. Though it is impossible to
determine precise water savings from this type of program, it is recognized in the water
profession that information and education are a key to a utility's effectiveness to serve its
customers. The water conservation office offers free information on a variety of
City of San Luis Obispo 65
Urban Water Management Pim.
conservation topics including leak detection, irrigation scheduling, landscaping, and water
hardware retrofitting. In addition, informational workshops and awareness programs are
promoted.
4.5.4 STAFFING EVALUATION
The initial water conservation program was staffed with seasonal temporary and contract
employees. In August 1988, it was recognized that the coordinator position should be made a
regular position to maintain continuity in the development and implementation of short-term and
long-term water efficiency programs. Staffing levels beyond the coordinator position have
continued to be filled by contract staff on an as-needed basis, and the level of staffing evaluated
annually. This staffing policy has given the City the flexibility to meet the short term
requirements and changing needs of the water conservation program. In the 1993-95 Financial
Plan, the approved level of staffing is for one regular position, one full-time contract person and
one full-time seasonal (May through September) employee.
To maintain an effective program and to meet the City's commitment to long-term water
efficiency and the BMP's, a change in staffing policy may be required. Also, if the City follows
the recommendations made in the Hughes-Heiss reorganization study, Council may want to
consider an alternative staffing policy to support a resource management approach to achieve its
water conservation and solid waste management goals. These options will be evaluated and
presented to Council in the spring of 1994.
66 City of San Luis Obispo
CHAPTER 5
WATER FUND FINANCIAL PLAN
Policy
The City's will fully recover all water costs, operations, maintenance, capital, debt service, and
appropriate overhead, through water revenues. Resolution No. 6447 states the primary goals
of the City's water utility are to provide quality water service to its citizens and to function as
a self-sufficient enterprise. Under this policy, all water revenues are used only for water
purposes. The water fund will reimburse the general fund for all indirect costs pursuant to the
approved cost allocation plan.
Water impact fees were established in 1991 to pay for needed facilities and improvements
reasonably related to new development within the City. Based on the policies contained in
Section 2.6.3, impact fees will be set at a rate sufficient to ensure cost recovery for that portion
of new supplies attributable to the new development. These fees are adjusted annually to
account for changes in the cost of construction or other considerations which affect the
reasonable relationship between the fees and the cost of facilities and improvements on which
the fees are based.
Introduction
The City's Financial Plan policies require the annual review of the Water Fund financial needs.
Fees and rate structure must be evaluated to ensure that they are appropriate and equitable. Fees
and rates must be set at levels which fully cover the total cost of providing water services,
including operations, capital outlay and debt service. Annual review assures rate increases, if
required, can be kept to modest levels.
City policy requires that the Water Fund, as all other enterprise funds and the General Fund,
maintain a fund balance of at least 20% of operating expenditures. This is considered the
minimum level necessary to maintain the City's credit worthiness and to adequately provide for
economic uncertainties, local disasters, and other financial hardships or downturns in the local
or national economy; contingencies for unforeseen operating or. capital needs; cash flow
requirements.
In addition, fund balance levels must be sufficient to meet funding requirements for projects
approved in prior years which are carried forward into the new year; debt service reserve
requirements; reserves for encumbrances; and other reserves or designations required by
contractual obligations, state law, or generally accepted accounting principles.
City of San Luis Obispo 67
Urban Water Management Ply
5.1 ANNUAL WATER FUND REVIEW
In addition to stating that the primary goals of the water utility are to provide quality water
service and to function as a self-sufficient enterprise, Resolution No. 6447 states that city water
should meet all health standards, be free of bad taste and odors, provide adequate fire protection,
and assure reliability and continuity of service to users.
The annual review of the Water Fund is conducted with the above goals and philosophy in mind.
Appendix VI is a summary projection of revenues, expenditures and changes in financial position
for the Water Fund through fiscal year 1996-97. This projection, revised annually; outlines the
operations and capital improvement budget for the Water Fund as presented in the approved
1993-95 Financial Plan. These projections include funding for the expansion of the Salinas
Reservoir and for the completion of the upgrade to the Water Treatment Plant.
Key Variables
The following is a summary of the key variables in forecasting water fund revenue and expenses:
■ Short term and permanent level of water conservation
■ Base operating costs plus inflation
■ Debt service requirements
■ Water customer base growth rate (based on General Plan, not to exceed 1% per year)
■ Capital improvement charges ("impact fees" paid by new development)
■ Connection and meter charges
■ Service start-up fees
■ Major capital projects
The most recent water fund analysis, Appendix VI, provided a listing of these variables and what
was specifically assumed in the analysis.
City-operated Utility Rate Structure Objectives
Although both revenue requirements and rate structure are considered in the annual review of
the Water Fund, the revenue required to operate the water facilities and the rate structure by
which the revenue is generated are two separate issues. Revenue requirements tell how much
revenue is needed to fully recover the total cost of providing water services, including
operations, capital outlay and debt service. Rate structure describes how these costs will be
distributed among different types of customers. It is important to recognize that any rate
structure can be designed to ensure revenue adequacy.
The Council adopted the following rate review objectives in May, 1988:
■ Comply with legal requirements
■ Ensure revenue adequacy to fully meet system operating and capital needs
68 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management P..
■ Encourage conservation
■ Provide equity and fairness between classes of customers
■ Be easy to understand by our customers and easy to administer
■ Provide for ongoing review in order to facilitate rate stability
In January 1993, Council requested a review of the existing rate structure. Upon close
examination, it was felt that some of these goals were potentially in conflict. For example, a
rate structure that provided rate stability would probably not encourage conservation efforts.
A rate structure that was easy to understand by customers would not necessarily be equitable
between classes of customers.
With that in mind, potential rate structures were analyzed based on the primary "goal" that was
intended, viewing the goals as a continuum ranging from a strong bias towards rate stability to
a strong bias towards water conservation. At the end of the continuum emphasizing
conservation, rates would be composed entirely of commodity charges, with no flat rate charges.
At the opposite end of the continuum that emphasizes rate stability, the rates would be composed
entirely of flat rate charges with no commodity charges. The rate system based entirely on
commodity charges would produce revenue based entirely on consumption which would vary
from month to month. The rate system based on flat charges would not relate to consumption
at all, and would be the same every month.
Prior to March 1993, the City's water rate structure was a combination of a base charge related
to meter size and a two-tiered commodity charge based on an increasing block rate. After
March 1993, the city's rate structure was modified to be entirely commodity driven. It is now
a two-tiered increasing block rate with no base charge. Although rates changed by customer
type, it was a revenue neutral rate structure change. This type of rate structure encourages
conservation, recognizes that the marginal cost of adding new water resources is high, and is
easier for customers to understand. It is equitable among classes of customers, as no one group
is required to carry a disproportionate share of system costs. The primary disadvantage is that
the revenues may be very unstable if the customers have inconsistent consumption patterns.
Concerns about the predictability of consumption patterns due to conservation levels and rates
based wholly on commodity use (and the impact this could potentially have on revenues) could
be addressed through the adoption of a higher fund balance requirement. Also, the current 20%
fund balance requirement is applied only to operating expenditures. This may need to include
debt service as well.
Rate Setting Methodology
In determining water rate revenue requirements and setting recommended rates, the following
general methodology is used:
Step 1: Determine Water Fund revenue requirements for:
■ Operations and maintenance
■ Capital improvements and replacements
City of San Luis Obispo 69
Urban Water Management PL_
■ Debt service obligations (existing and projected)
Revenue requirements are generally projected for four years into the future.
Step 2: Subtract from this amount "non-rate revenues" such as:
■ Interest earnings
■ Connection fees and meter sales
■ Sale of electricity from hydroplant operations
■ Other service charges
Step 3: Identify water rate revenue requirements
Revenue to be generated from water rates is the difference between water revenue
requirements (Step 1) and "non-rate" revenues (Step 2).
Step 4: Determine new rates.
Model the rate base (consumption and customer account assumptions ) against the
existing rate structure and rate requirements identified in Step 3.
70 City of San Luis Obispo
Urban Water Management Pi.
5.2 IMPACT FEES
The City adopted impact fees (also called "connection fees") in 1991, following a high degree
of community discussion. The adopted fees were calculated under the requirements of AB 1600,
which states that a "reasonable relationship" must exist between the need and the cost for a
public facility and the development on which the fee is imposed. The goal of the adopted fees
was to assure that new development paid its fair share of the cost of constructing necessary
community facilities. This goal was the 1990 recommendation of the Citizens' Advisory
Committee (CAC) established to review and evaluate the City's long term financial health.
Based on prior Council direction and adoption of the policies contained in Sections 2.3 and 2.6,
staff has evaluated the necessary impact fees to recover the cost of new supplies associated with
new development. The detailed evaluation is included as Appendix VII.
City of San Luis Obispo 71
APPENDIX I
WATER POLICY SUMMARY
Note: * Denotes a new or significantly modified existing policy.
2.1 SAFE ANNUAL YIELD DETERMINATION
2.1.1 Safe annual yield will be based on coordinated operation of all water supply
sources.
2.1.2 The current safe annual yield is 7,735 acre-feet per year.
2.1.3 A. The amount of groundwater which the City will rely upon is identified in Section
2.1.2. The City will maximize the use of groundwater in conjunction with other
available water supplies to maximize the yield and long term reliability of all
water resources and to minimize overall costs for meeting urban water demands.
The City shall monitor water levels at the well sites.
B. The City will not compete with local agricultural use of groundwater outside the
urban reserve line or damage wildlife habitat through reduced natural stream
flows in obtaining long-term sources of water supply.
2.2 WATER CONSERVATION POLICY
2.2.1* Long-term water efficiency measures will maintain long-term, per-capita usage at or
below the per capita use rate as identified in Section 2.3.2.
2.2.2 Short-term mandatory measures will be implemented when the City's water
supplies are projected to last three years.
2.3 WATER DEMAND PROJECTIONS
2.3.1* Separate projections of potable and nonpotable water requirements will be made.
2.3.2* The City shall use 145 gallons per person per day (0.162 acre-feet) to plan for future
water supplies.
2.3.3* Projected water demand at General Plan buildout is about 9,096 acre-feet.
2.3.4* Present water demand is calculated by multiplying the water use identified in Section
2.3.2 by the current city population.
City of San Luis Obispo I-1
APPENDIX I
2.4 RELIABILITY RESERVE
The City will strive for a reliability reserve of 2,000 acre-feet.
2.5* SILTATION AT SALINAS & WHALE ROCK RESERVOIRS
The City shall develop 500 acre feet of safe annual yield to account for the loss of
water storage due to siltation at Salinas and Whale Rock reservoirs to the year 2025.
2.6* SUPPLEMENTAL WATER REQUIREMENTS
2.6.1* The City shall develop additional water supplies to meet projected demand at build-
out of the General Plan, to establish the reliability reserve, and to offset water yields
lost due to siltation. The amount of water to be developed shall be based on the
adopted per capita water use figure in Section 2.3.2.
2.6.2* In deciding on appropriate sources of supplemental water, the City will evaluate the
impacts on other users of the water and the environment.
2.6.3* The cost for developing new water supplies necessary for new development will be
paid by impact fees.
2.7 MULTI-SOURCE WATER SUPPLY
The City shall continue to develop and use water resource projects to maintain
multi-source water supplies to reduce reliance on any one source.
2.8* ALLOCATION OF NEW WATER SUPPLIES
2.8.1* When new water sources are obtained, the additional yield shall be allocated first to
eliminate any deficit between safe annual yield (Section 2.1) and present demand as
defined in Sections 2.1 and 2.3.4 at the time the new source is obtained.
2.8.2* A. The City will make available to new development only that amount of safe yield
which exceeds present water use (Section 2.3.4). Allocations from a new water
supply project shall be considered available at the time project construction is
initiated.
B. Any additional safe annual yield beyond any deficit elimination will be allocated
(A) one-half to the reliability reserve and compensating for reduced yields due to
siltation and (B) one-half to development (see section 2.8.3).
C. Until 100% retrofit of the City, the amount by which safe annual yield (Section
2.1.2) exceeds present demand shall not be made available to development.
1-2 City of San Luis Obispo
- APPENDIX I
2.8.3* A sufficient amount of water supply, including water savings from retrofitting, will
be held in reserve to serve intensification and infill within existing City limits as of
July 1994.
2.8.4* Reclaimed water shall be accounted for as a non-potable supply and shall not-be
considered as a component of City's potable water safe annual yield.
2.8.5* When developments are supplied by private groundwater wells, the yield of
those wells will not be counted toward the City's safe yield.
2.9 WATER ALLOCATION & OFFSETS
2.9.1* A. When there is no safe annual yield to allocate to new projects, a project may be
built if a developer retrofits existing facilities which will reduce long-term water
usage equal to twice the allocation required for the project.
B. Exemptions to needing a water allocation or an offset, or reducing the amount of
the required allocation of offset for a project will be granted to the extent that a
project is supplied by a suitable private well which will not significantly affect the
yield of City wells.
2.9Z* Required allocations and offsets will be based on long-term usage for each type of
development.
2.10* RECLAIMED WATER
2.10.1* The City shall produce high quality reclaimed water, suitable for a wide range of
nonpotable uses.
2.10.2* The City will make available reclaimed water as allowed by law to supply new non-
potable uses.
2.10.3* As reclaimed water supplies new or existing development, the reliable yield of
nonpotable water will increase. The increase in reliable nonpotable yield will be
credited only when it is available to a user.
2.10.4* When the City provides distribution facilities for reclaimed water, the resulting
reduction in potable demand will be given offset credit for government projects.
2.10.5* When a private project provides the distribution facilities that allow for the use of
reclaimed water in existing development, the resulting reduction in potable water
demand will be credited on a two-to-one basis. When a private project provides
distribution facilities to that project, any required potable water allocation shall be
reduced by a corresponding amount.
City of San Luis Obispo I-3
APPENDIX I
2.10.6* When a component of the reclaimed water distribution system is funded by both the
City and a private developer, the credit for reduction in potable water usage resulting
from that component shall be divided according to the proportionate share based on
the contribution to the component.
2.11 WATER SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY
The City will be the only purveyor of water within the City.
OTHER URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN POLICIES
Chapter 3* Supplemental Water Supply Projects
The City shall pursue the expansion of Salinas reservoir, the Nacimiento Reservoir
Diversion Project, water reuse, and water demand management activities as
supplemental water supply sources.
Chapter 4* Water Operational Programs
The City shall sustain city-wide water efficiency programs and strive to provide an
adequate supply of high quality water which meets all government standards, flows
at sufficient pressures, and provides fire protection. The City shall allocate funding
to meet those goals and objectives. The City should strive to replace aging water
lines at the annual rate of 2% of the replacement value of the water distribution
system.
Chapter 5, Financial Plan
The City's policy is to fully recover all water costs, operations, maintenance, capital,
debt service, and appropriate overhead, through water revenues. All water revenues
are used only for water purposes. The water fund will reimburse the general fund
for all indirect costs pursuant to the approved cost allocation plan. Water impact fees
were established in 1991 to pay for needed facilities and improvements reasonably
related to new development within the City.
I-4 City of San Luis Obispo
APPENDIX II
� m 3 Amo m a
° c mm O
�, dl O
> �+ N .O 7 m w
L
Ol N N ` U j w m m a c
— r
CD m
° (J m 3 m m m m O
cc 0
c v c y �CL m
a m p° y a m « 10 d m
o U a �$ E Na co my a
CD m « a m « mV E m CD 7
E a 9 C ` m e > 01 m E a m E
m o m m
O` 'V �+ N l`O E9 « a yjL N
> c E = 0 3 0 CL cm m ° E � >
ON m E a > > c > y x CD mo N M
m ., •• m m m
y jcV m > mmomvc 3cm.Eui«
� L a+ °� O) m C w C m CD
m N C U rLil
v �� c ` Nom E L o .5
y .'Q...... L o m „ m o c 'moo m c N E
m ° a > « m m mw > m „ y c '0 N ma
m' . EcmL ID " � mocCL
a E
z L m — 2 3 m N N o >
m > w � G a c m m c
d0 c m > > m o 0 v 3 �, o �=
N
W rr O N N U y y m M m a N j V C VFA `
�1^ 5 �m e y 0) C E �' an d � � c°> _> 0 u o0 0
^ M m « U m C — N N O C m O > O C m C m
0.1w m 0 m Ol U w m r c U ri w w O a m m t�0 0
oQC 3: `o U ° � •� Q W c y m 0 m ,Cl �, x 3a m
3 Q_ m N m O N L L > > N. U to m M m O m m 3
y m !:' '� '0 'o m m m m
d C o O1� mm ° � Z > 3m mv' cNo 3 'Um � ow >
LLQ ., m v1 c «N o o w H > " c > c a ° a
Q u m «O. V 0 oo Q m H U ° U O � U - 0 •C a y j
c, °y � _ �'0 3 N x m x Ua ca m o N
�•'� Q •y ` to V 7 .. A .V L a a
•O •m L -m •; O Cm 7r ` r C
z ai O o � « c o`, ,', Qaocio E m y c E ° Qom Li
Q ., m m N O. .`. .L., m U
r� •U v (J m o. o
a arm .o dc � 3mc
co _ > L > « m
tea' c FL- o 3m10 °7mmoc >
o Eo
Q
zNcli CV)
w Z
Li
m C m
CD
o E ECL"
V O O 0) x m O m
M C f/) fn
C •O >
C Q a m C
LLI D m
m
ILM
City of San Luis Obispo II-1
APPENDIX II
M
M r-
> C m m E O m
CD
L _ C
m w co m 0 C mo
C m C O C •� U C O
0 U m Na m m m m N
f0
CLr
d co
0 O a •« C G m m 0_
C L E w
V1 > C m O > 0 -0
y o E ° v > m eco
•+ U m C m w y N m V'5
E � o > ae0i m L QD CD n3
m U cn
O m m = Q y > m m C y
m a=_ 3 m ; E a cmi
�t m c ; m
C U ci ma o0 v
m 'O
phi � L « � yO « � c > t my
U 'a
cn U y C y m ~O m w > L D C > M
w U) m 'r L 'O m L
w H m O L 7 m H U
O m m co � 3 V
0:: y L « C Q OQ m — O
7 N O O:..d. :':::: U y Coh wO t a) L 'w O
U N 0 O m 7 10
�.r m U 3 C eC L H C w 'O y m
M C C
Wl CA w m w C to ` E C M cc m ca t0
CD CD
m 0 CD w E m co >to a C t C-
•b W mGof _m a .. 7 CDC
G' [n - C O p a .m+ H a c
` :U 7 0 0 3 Q (DU m —_ C C O
y w C •� CD
N C = 7 3 *-S �. .y. m -O
A ,Cd U y C
3 Ea d p Y � �a m m
�i N
z a O L w fn — O 7 E is eL0 'O D1
Q a m O 0 U N L J U m L O C
1rr���.1 O 0 C L y N N a > C
F-� « r d C — O .� w
Q o 3 a E o u y a m > c r
m o m = o m m
a E c m m m U r d y m H v o
N
L L y L a X m C m j O
►- .. v aca
a `m
C�
W a � •�
z ° M - N
�W z " c� cp
N
C C
G O N d m ai
r N mN t0 -O
U N O ICO w N U
�j0 w xQ •� = a.
Q W a
m
a N LO
M
II-2 City of San Luis Obispo
APPENDIX III
WATER SUPPLY PROJECTS
NO LONGER BEING PURSUED
The following projects have been considered in the past as supplemental water supply projects
for the City of San Luis Obispo. Feasibility studies and/or reports have been prepared for these
projects and are available in the Utilities Department library at 955 Morro Street. These
projects are not being pursued due to economic, environmental or other identified problems.
1. Coastal Streams Diversion Project
2. State Water Project
3. Hansen and Gularte Creeks Project
4. San Bernardo Creek Project
City of San Luis Obispo �_1
APPENDIX ry
Water Distribution / Customer Service
Workload Analysis
Current Workload Customer Service Section:
Current Staffing: 3 Full-Time Personnel
Task Description Staff Hours/Week
1. Compound Meter Test and Calibration 5.9 (4%)
2. Turn Ons/Offs 24.2 (18%)
3. Re-reads / High Bills 14.8 (11%)
4. Meter Leak Repairs 20.5 (15%)
5. Meter Maintenance 2.4 (2%)
6. Meter Retrofit 12.0 (9%)
7. Meter Sets/Resets 3.9 (3%)
8. Miscellaneous Investigations 6.0 (6%)
9. Scheduled Meter Reads 39.5 (29%)
10. Service Discontinuance 6.2 (5%)
TOTAL HOURS/WEEK 136.4
FTE'S 3.4
* 0.4 FrE is currently covered by personnel from Distribution Section
** The above analysis is a reflection of the ratio .of time spent on programs and
services, not an exact accounting of weekly workloads.
City of San Luis Obispo IV-1
APPENDIX IV
Current Workload Water Distribution Section
Current Staffing: 5 Full-time Personnel
Task Description Staff Hours/Week
1. Pump Station & Tank Maintenance 18.4 (10%)
2. PRV/PSV Maintenance 9.2 (5%)
3. Water Main Failures/Repairs 36.7 (20%)
4. Service Line Failures/Repairs 73.4 (40%)
5. Hydrant Repair/Installation 14.7 (8%)
6. Miscellaneous Repairs/Upgrades 18.4 (10%)
7. Large Meter Change-Outs 3.7 (2%)
8. USA Markouts 9.2 (5%)
TOTAL HOURS/WEEK 183.7
FTE'S 4.6
* Current workload analysis is based on past three years of actual work order
records. Analysis does not include supervisors time and assistance provided by
supervisor in the field.
IV-2 City of San Luis Obispo
APPENDIX IV
Preventative Maintenance Program:
Task Description Staff Hours/Week
1. Pumps, Motors, Controls and Facility Maintenance 15 (17%)
2. Storage Facilities
a. Steel Storage Tanks 5 (6%)
b. Hydro-pneumatic Facility 5 (6%)
3. PRV/PSV Preventative Maintenance 15 (17%)
4. Valve Maintenance Program 30 (32%)
5. Valve Replacement/Repair Program 10 (11%)
6. Equipment and Tool Maintenance 10 (11%)
TOTAL ESTIMATED HOURS/WEEK 90
ESTIMATED FTE'S 2.25
City of San Luis Obispo IV-3
APPENDIX V
WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAMS
AND SERVICES
A. Best Management Practices
B. Current Programs and Services
C. Evaluation of Programs and Technologies
City of San Luis Obispo V-1
APPENDIX V
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES - Implementation Update
The sixteen elements of the Best Management Practices are to be implemented over a three year period and completed by the tenth
year. Because of the water crisis the Cityfaced between 1989 to 1992, most of the sixteen measures have already been established.
BMPs (BY NUMBER) SCHEDULED FOR YEAR ONE IMPLEMENTATION
BMP No. 2. Enforcement of water conserving plumbing fixture standards in all new construction
Plumbing, New beginning January 1, 1992. All pipeline projects required to utilized water conserving plumbing
and Retrofit futures as of January 1, 1989. All other building projects subject to State standards as of January
1, 1992.
Support State and Federal legislation prohibiting the sale of toilets using more than 1.6
gallons per flush. Legislation passed by the State in November 1992 prohibiting the sale of
toilets using more than 1.6 gallons per flush as of January 1, 1994.
BMP No. 3. In 1988, a water distribution evaluation and leak detection program was developed. This
System Water evaluation identified potential problem areas in the system and made recommendations for water
Audit Year 1. line replacement projects.
BMP No. 7. The City supports an ongoing public information program, including:
Public ■ Speaker; to community groups and media
Information. ■ Paid and public service advertising
■ Bill inserts
■ Billing information comparisons
■ Water Conservation handouts
■ Water Conservation workshops and fairs
BMP No. 8.
School The Water Conservation office offers a Resource Education Guide to provide teachers with
Education information on available resource education materials and instructional assistance.
BMP No. 13. The water waste codes currently prohibit
Water Waste ■ Use of substandard water fixtures;
Prohibition ■ Water run-off from property;
■ Use of water from fire hydrants except for fire fighting;
■ Serving of water in restaurants unless requested;
■ Use of potable water to wash sidewalks, driveways, etc.;
■ Use of potable water for construction.
Accurate records on water waste contacts and violations have been maintained since July 1990.
As of January 1993, the records indicate the following:
■ 500 contacts for water run-off violations with a friendly warning;
■ 110 water waste consultations without a wanting;
■ 180 warning notices;
■ 27 Notices to Correct;
■ 2 letters from the City Attorney's office;
■ 445 requests from citizens to investigate water waste.
BA4P No. 14. A regular position was approved in August 1988.
Water
Conservation
Coordinator
V-2 City of San Luis Obispo
APPENDIX V
BMPs SCHEDULED FOR YEAR TWO IMPLEMENTATION
IP No. 2. Plumbing Retrofit-Delivery of low flow showerheads and toilet displacement devices
.sumbing, New In 1987, retrofit kits including low-flow showerheads and toilet dams were delivered to 5,800
and Retrofit households in the City through the CARE program. The City continues to offer free low-flow
showerheads upon request.
BMP No. 3. Water system failure shifted the focus from leak detection to repair and replacement in 1989.
Distribution
System Audits
BMP No. 4. All water services within the City are metered.
Metering with
Commodity
Rates for all
new/existing
connections
BMP No 6. New and Existing Commercial, Industrial, Institutional, Governmental and Multi-Family
Landscape In March 1992, Council adopted Ordinance No. 1209 which established water efficient landscape
Water standards for all new development. This ordinance was submitted to the State and accepted,
Conservation bringing the City into compliance with AB 325, the Water Conservation in Landscaping Act.
Requirements
.'P No. 11, Effective March 1, 1993, a revised two-tiered rate structure encouraging conservation and
Conservation establishing a lifeline usage figure was adopted. It also eliminated the readiness to serve charge.
Pricing
BMP No. 12. ■ In March 1992, Council adopted Ordinance No. 1209, establishing water efficient landscape
Landscape standards for all new development.
Water ■ Each spring and fall,water conservation office sponsors a water efficent plant tagging program
Conservation for in conjunction with local nurseries to encourage installation of water efficient planting.
New and ■ During February 1992, the City's first water conserving demonstration garden was installed as
Existing SFR a joint project between the City, local landscape professionals and Cal Poly. Water consumption
at the site is down 75% from previous average water use (was a large turf area).
■ Free information and consultations upon request.
BMP No. 16. The City has three programs addressing toilet replacement:
Ultra Low Flush ■ Retrofit Rebate Program - to date approximately 3,000 toilets have been replaced.
Toilet ■ Water Offset Program - to date approximately 3,500 toilets have been replaced by developers
Replacement applying for building permits.
■ Retrofit Upon Sale Ordinance - Since January, approximately 300 toilets have been replaced.
City of San Luis Obispo V-3
APPENDIX V
BMPs SCHEDULED FOR YEAR THREE IMPLEMENTATION
BMP No. 1. Incentive Programs for Single Family, Multi-Family Residential and Governmental,
Interior and Institutional Customers
Exterior Water ■ Water Conservation staff performed 400 residential/commercial water audits during 1992.
Audits. Results are being monitored with an evaluation set for the end of 1993.
Incentive ■ After evaluating the top 20% water users, it was determined that multi-family cdmplexes should
Programs for be a primary target of informational materials on the Retrofit Rebate Program and free water
SF, MF auditing services.
Residential and
Governmental/
Institutional
Customers
BMP No. S. ■ Water conservation and Parks Division staff have systematically performed irrigation audits on
Large City parks. Eleven such audits have been performed. Results were mixed. Several parks are
Landscape being retrofitted to improve water distribution efficiency.
Audits 8 Water conservation staff is in the process of auditing the larger greenbelt areas in the newer
developments in the Tank Farm area.
■Water conservation staff has been working closely with landscape maintenance professionals in
evaluating irrigation system efficiency in several condominium and apartment complexes.
BMP No. 9. The 1993/95 water conservation plan focuses on the commercial/industrial customer sector.
Commercial and
Industrial Water
Use Review
BMP No. 10. Currently, new construction water allocations and required water offsets are based on the amount
New of water the development will use on an annual basis. This means that developers are using the
Commercial and most water efficient technology available to lower the water demand of their project. The lower
Industrial Water the demand, the lower the required retrofitting that must take place prior to approval to build.
Use Review
BMP No. 15. In addition to the rebates for water hardware retrofitting, other incentive programs are being
Financial researched and analyzed for cost effectiveness.
Incentivess
V-4 City of San Luis Obispo
APPENDIX V
CURRENT PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
Using the BMPs as a guide, the water conservation office has developed programs and
procedures to reach the City's goal of long term water efficiency through out the community.
The following section will briefly explain the programs and services.
Programs and Services
1. Retrofit Rebate Program
Customers are offered up to $100 per bathroom to replace toilets, showerheads, and
faucet aerators with water efficient hardware.
2. Retrofit Upon Sale Ordinance
Effective October 15, 1992, any property sold or transferred must be retrofitted prior to
the close of escrow with water conserving plumbing hardware.
3. Indoor Water Use Evaluations
Water efficiency specialists evaluate all indoor water use and recommend water efficiency
measures to residential and commercial customers.
4. Irrigation Evaluation and Audit
The water conservation office offers free irrigation systems evaluation and will perform
distribution and uniformity audits to determine irrigation scheduling and make
recommendations to improve water efficiency.
5. Water Efficient Plant Material Consultations
Printed information and suggestions are offered to customers interested in retrofitting
existing landscapes with water conserving plant materials.
6. School Education Program
The water conservation office offers programs and materials for grades 1 through 12.
7. Public Information and Education Program
Ongoing informational and promotional advertising both paid and public service
announcements. Variety of printed informational brochures and pamphlets available free
of charge. Educational workshops on water efficiency topics offered to the public.
S. Water Waste Code Enforcement
Mostly an educational, water efficiency specialist contact customers experiencing water
run-off problems and offer suggestions on how to solve these problems.
9. Low Income Assistance Water Audit Program
People applying for low income assistance on their water/wastewater bill are required to
have a home water audit performed before being granted a utility bill reduction.
City of San Luis Obispo V-5
APPENDIX V
10. Residential Resource Conservation Services Program
A joint program which incorporates recycling and water conservation into one effort.
Specific neighborhoods are targeted and residents are encouraged to participate in the
water audit and recycling programs.
11. Multi-family Resource Conservation Services Program
A program developed specifically for multi-family complexes to assist in establishing
successful recycling programs and achieving water efficiency.
V-6 City of San Luis Obispo
APPENDIX V
WATER CONSERVATION TECHNOLOGIES
Evaluation of Reliability, Water Savings, Cost
In evaluating the water savings potential from water conservation technologies and programs, the
reliability of the potential savings must be considered. Many components of a comprehensive water
conservation program have not been adequately studied to determine reliable water savings. Staff has
attempted to objectively evaluate the potential for each technology or program and then determine the
reliability of the estimated savings. Staff has developed a rating system to measure the reliability of each
component. The rating system is based on the following criteria:
1. Availability of quantitative data
2. Ongoing dependability of the water efficiency measure
3. Public acceptance of the water efficiency measure
The reliability factor will be on a scale of one to five and will reflect the criteria previously outlined.
A factor of five means that the savings can be definitely counted on as permanent ongoing water savings.
WATER CONSERVATION TECHNOLOGIES
Water conservation technologies have advanced significantly over the last several years. Most of the
developments have been a response to the recent drought. This analysis is limited to technologies which
are associated with the largest indoor water use, graywater systems, landscape and public information
programs which can potentially yield reliable water savings:
Reliability Factor
Section 1. ULTRA-LOW FLUSH TOILETS 4.5
Section 2. LOW-FLOW SHOWERHEADS 3.5
Section 3. GRAYWATER SYSTEMS 2.0
Section 4. HOT WATER RECIRCULATING SYSTEMS 1.0
Section S. LANDSCAPING 2.0
Section 6. INFORMATION & EDUCATION 2.0
Section 1. ULTRA-LOW FLUSH TOILETS (ULF) Reliability Factor: 4.5
As of January 1993, all toilets sold in the State of California must meet the ULF standard of 1.6 gallons
per flush or less. A study was completed in June 1992, funded by the Metropolitan Water District of
Southern California, to evaluate toilet replacement programs and establish reliable water savings
projections. This study has been endorsed by the California Urban Water Conservation Council (which
the City is a member of) and is now recognized as a state-wide standard for toilet replacement programs.
The reliability rating of 4.5 is based on the quantitative data available from the Metropolitan Water
District's ULF toilet replacement study completed in June 1992, the 20 to 30 year operational life of a
toilet and the public's approval of the technology derived from a City survey conducted in 1991.
City of San Luis Obispo V-7
APPENDIX V
ULTRA-LOW FLUSH TOILET
Estimated Water Savings
Single Family 1/ 350 afy Assumes 41.9 gallons/day/household
multiplied by 7,500 households.
Multi-Family 1/ 325 afy Assumes 53 gallons/day/dwelling
multiplied by 5,500 dwellings.
All Others 2/ 260 afy Assumes 27 gallons/per toilet/per day
multiplied by 8,750 toilets.
TOTAL 935 acre feet per year ("afy")
Notes:
1/ Single family and multi-family gallons/day/household derived from information contained
in the Metropolitan Water District toilet replacement study.
2/ Based on average water use factors for retrofitted ULF toilets.
Table 1
Based on the figures provided in the study, it is estimated that water savings at 100% toilet retrofit in the
City is 935 acre feet (af) per year and is summarized in Table 1. In performing the cost evaluation,
staff examined the total amount of capital required to fund the current Retrofit Rebate Program to 100%
completion of retrofitting and the cost of a program where the City pays the full cost of the toilet retrofit.
Table 2 summarizes the results of the analysis which includes the cost per acre foot to the City.
ULTRA-LOW FLUSH TOILET
Cost Evaluation
Assumptions. (installation costs do not include floor covering changes or sub floor rehabilitation.)
1. Cost per toilet $85 to $300
2. Cost for installation $50 to $100
Alternative A Voluntary Retrofit Rebate Program
(Assumes 26% change-out of existing toilets as of 4194 and$100 rebate)
Total $2.37 million
Cost per acre foot $255 over a ten year period
Alternative B Mandatory Retrofit Program
(Assumes City pays all costs; cost to replace standard toilet and labor is
estimated at $165/toilet. Costs for flooring changes and additional charges for
custom toilets not included.)
Total $3.9 million
Cost per acre foot $420 over a ten year period
Table 2
V-S City of San Luis Obispo
- APPENDIX V
Section 2. LOW-FLOW SHOWERHEADS Reliability Factor. 3.5
The current State standard for a low-flow showerheads is a flow rate of 2.5 gallons per minute. In order
to calculate long range water savings from showerhead replacement, the projected savings are based on
water use and population figures from 1993..
The CARE Program, (joint effort with PG&E) initiated in LOW-FLOW SHOWERHEADS
1987 and implemented in 1988, replaced an estimated 27% Estimated Water Savings
of the showerheads in the City during that year. Since 1988, 1993 Population 43,415
low-flow showerheads have been a requirement in new
construction and thousands were replaced during mandatory Average savings 6.2 gallons/
water conservation. It is estimated that 70% to 80% of the person/day
showerheads are currently low-flow.
TOTAL
It is estimated that 300 acre feet per year of water savings Estimated savings 300 of/year
will be achieved at 100% retrofit of showerheads. Table 3 (based on Rocky Mountain Institute data)
summarizes the total estimated water savings and assumptions Table 3
used to calculate the estimated water savings.
Section 3. GRAYWATER Reliability Factor: 2.0
Graywater is defined as untreated household waste water which includes water from bathtubs, showers,
bathroom wash basins, and water from clothes washing machines and laundry tubs. It does not include
water that has come into contact with toilet waste, kitchen sinks, dishwashers or laundry water from
soiled diapers. Up until 1989, the use of graywater was not regulated in the State of California and was
viewed as an illegal use of household wastewater by local health agencies. During 1989/1990, several
counties and cities, including San Luis Obispo, legalized the use of graywater as a drought emergency
measure. In July 1992 legislation was passed which directed the Department of Water Resources (DWR)
to develop graywater use regulations. DWR working with the Department of Health Services and other
concerned organizations and individuals, spent 18 months developing standards which protect public
health while establishing a uniform set of Statewide standards. On March 8, 1994 the California Building
Standards Commission approved the Graywater Standards as part of the California Plumbing Code.
These standards were published on May 8, 1994 and will take effect in every California city and county
in six months.
The new regulations restrict the application of graywater to single family dwellings and is allowed only
under certain conditions and circumstances. The primary limitations are 1) the water application setback
requirements from adjoining properties, 2) application can only be sub-surface, 3) soil conditions must
allow for adequate infiltration without puddling or runoff, and 4) at a sufficient distance above the
groundwater level to avoid potential water contamination. The reliability factor of 2.0 is based on the
wide range of water savings estimates from the various .
sources of graywater, the ability of user to discontinue the use of the systems, the limitations placed on
graywater use by State law and the degree of commitment from the user to maintain the systems.
City of San Luis Obispo V-9
APPENDIX V
GRAYWATER
Estimated Water Savings
EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY 1/
Assumes a total of 7,500 single family dwellings. Slab foundations are assumed on 75% of the dwellings
and raised foundations on 25% of the dwellings. (75% of 7,500 = 5,625; 25% of 7,500 = 1,875)
Raised Foundation 220.5 afy 2/ Assumes 105 gallons/day/household
multiplied by 1,875 dwellings.
Slab Foundation 283.5 afy 3/ Assumes 45 gallons/day/household
multiplied by 5,625 dwellings.
TOTAL 504 acre feet per year ("afy")
Less Seasonal Demand (4 Months) 336 acre feet per year 4/
Notes:
1/ Multi-Family excluded. Currently, State law does not allow the use of graywater at multi-family
complexes. Legislation has been introduced in the State legislature to legalize the use of
graywater in multi-family and certain commercial situations.
2/ Assumes 35 gal/person/day and an average of 3 persons per household for all graywater sources
(this is an average of the State's published guidelines and a study performed by LADWP completed
in June 1993.
3/ Based on the recently adopted State guidelines for graywater use for laundry wash water (15
gallons per person per day).
4/ These savings assume that all the graywater is needed for irrigation; that this amount of
potable water would have been used and that all potential locations are able to use graywater.
Table 4
The results of the analysis indicate that graywater systems can yield 336 of/year of water savings. Table
4 summarizes the assumptions and results of the analysis.
Cost Evaluation
The cost of a graywater system varies greatly with its complexity and capabilities. Approximate price
ranges, corresponding capabilities of systems and installation cost, as suggested by manufacturers and
installers are listed below:
Systems costing between $400 to $800
This range applies to systems that tap the discharge from the washing machine only, connected to a low-
tech system. The lower end of the price range applies to the do-it-yourself installation, and the upper
end to professional installation.
V-10 City of San Luis Obispo
APPENDIX V
Systems costing between $1,000 to $1,500
In this price range, all graywater sources are usually connected to the system which generally requires
installation by a professional contractor. The graywater collection and distribution system is still relatively
simple and low-tech, and the total cost depends on the number of graywater sources connected.
Systems costing between $2,000 to $3,700
Graywater systems in this price range are fully automatic, high-tech systems, connected to nearly all
sources of graywater in the home and possibly backed up by potable water systems for periods when
graywater may not be available.
Based on this information, Table 5 summarizes the results of the graywater system cost analysis.
GRAYWATER
Cost Evaluation Summary 1/
Alternative A Washing Machine Water Only Systems
Based on 15 gallons per person per day, during irrigation
demand months.
Total System Cost $ 400 to $2,000
Cost per acre foot $1,200 to $5,950
Alternative B All Source Systems
Based on 105 gallons per household, during irrigation months.
Total System Cost $1,000 to $3,700
Cost per acre foot $1,275 to $4,720
Note:
1/ These costs do not include the cost of the specialized irrigation
equipment required to apply graywater to the landscape.
Table 5
"Low Tech" systems require regular maintenance, such as filter cleaning, by the resident to minimize
graywater system failure. On the other hand, fully automated systems require little or no maintenance
on the part of the user. It is a concern with low tech systems that if routine maintenance is not
performed, the system will experience problems which will ultimately lead to a failure and the system
being turned off. Low tech systems require a commitment from the user in order to retain reliability and
thus achieve long term water savings. In order to determine a reliable water savings from graywater
systems, it is recommended that only fully automated systems be part of any City sponsored graywater
program. Though automated systems require a greater initial expense, long term water savings can be
reasonably predicted with greater reliability. Table 6 summarizes-the cost of a rebate program and the
cost of a program where the City pays full cost of the "High Tech" graywater systems.
City of San Luis Obispo V-11
- APPENDIX V
GRAYWATER - "High Tech" Systems
Cost Evaluation
Assumptions. 1. Cost for laundry only systems $2,000 1/
2. Cost for all source systems $2,000 to$3,700 1/
3. See Note 1.
Alternative A Rebate Program
Cost per acre foot reflects City's willingness to pay $1,500 per acre foot.
Therefore, the City would pay a rebate of$500 for laundry only systems and
$1,175 for all source systems. 2/
Laundry Only Systems
Total $2,812,500
All Source Systems
Total $2,203.125
TOTAL $5,015,625
Cost per acre foot $ 1,500
Alternative B Full system cost paid by City
Laundry Only Systems
Total $11,250,000
All Source Systems
Total $3.750.000 to $6.937.500
TOTAL $15,000,000 to $18,187,500
Cost per acre foot $4,460 to $5,410
Note:
1/ Laundry only systems are assumed to be possible in all single family dwellings on
slab foundations. Slab foundations are assumed to be on 7545 of single family
dwellings (75% X 7,500 = 5,625). All source systems are assumed to be possible
in single family dwellings on raised foundations(25% X 7,500 = 1,875).
2/ Customer Cost (after rebate)
• Laundry only systems $1,500 Payback period 32 years
• All source systems $825 to $2,525 Payback period 12-34 years
Table 6
V-12 City of San Luis Obispo
APPENDIX V
Section 4. Hot Water Recirculating Systems Reliability Factor: 1.0
Hot water recirculating systems work on the principal of providing hot water on demand at all locations
in a house. By drawing hot water from the hot water heater and recirculating the cold water from the
hot water line back to the heater, a significant amount of water may be saved. Staff has researched the
availability of retrofit hot water recirculating systems and found only one company which manufactures
such a product. There are several variables which effect the amount of water savings which can be
derived from these systems. The variables include:
■ Size of household
■ Plumbing layout
■ Square footage of dwelling
■ Customer habits
Of these variables, plumbing layout is the most significant. After consulting with plumbing professionals,
it is estimated that less than 50% of the existing homes would benefit from the installation of this type
of system. Most older homes are not plumbed with complete looping of hot and cold water lines which
means more than one of these systems would be required to recirculate all the hot and cold water within
the dwelling. Table 7 summarizes the results of the potential water savings analysis.
HOT WATER RECIRCULATING SYSTEMS
Estimated Water Savings
Based on manufacturer information and discussions with plumbing
contractors and product users, the following water savings may
be achieved:
Existing 43 to 105 afy Assumes 10 to 25
Single Family gallons/day/household;
50% of existing dwellings.
New Construction 44 to 117 afy Assumes 3 to 8
gallons/daylhousehold;
and additional population-
13,100--at buildout.
TOTAL 87 to 222 acre feet per year ("afy")
Table 7
These systems are not fully automated and rely on the user to activate the recirculating pump. Because
of the number of variables, it is difficult to derive a reliable water savings amount from this type of
system.
Table 8 summarizes the cost analysis for both a rebate program and a program where the City pays for
the system and installation.
City of San Luis Obispo V-13
APPENDIX V
HOT WATER RECIRCULATING SYSTEMS
Cost Evaluation
Assumption: The cost of a retrofit hot water circulating system is appraximately$300. Installation cost is
estimated at approximatety $150 to $250 depending on the location of the unit. The calculations
use $200 for labor. Estimates are based on 50% of existing homes.
Alternative A Rebate Program -Existing Single Family
Estimated program cost (City paid rebate of$425).
TOTAL $425 X 3,750 dwellings $1,593,750
Cost per Acre Foot $1,500 based on 105 afy savings
Alternative B Full Cost paid by City
TOTAL $500 X 3,750 dwellings $1,875,000
Cost per Acre Foot $1,785 based on 105 afy savings
Table 8
Section S. LANDSCAPE PROGRAMS Reliability Factor: 2.0
Predicting water savings from landscape efficiency programs is difficult and can vary from 30% to 70%
when conventional landscapes are replaced with water efficient plants (RMI Water Efficient Landscaping
1994). Another, often less expensive component of a landscape efficiency program is improved irrigation
management and upgrades of irrigation hardware. Water savings from landscape irrigation improvements
is estimated to be up to 30% (Cal Poly Pomona for Chino Basin). To date, landscaping programs do not
provide readily predictable or measurable water savings due to lack of data on projects that have been
carried out and the difficulties in distinguishing landscape water savings from those caused by indoor
water efficiency projects and behavioral changes in reaction to drought situations (RMI 1994).
The reliability factor of 2.0 is based lack of quantitative data regarding water savings, the fact that
landscape plant materials can be changed to higher water using plants depending on customer preference,
and that the efficiency of irrigation systems can vary depending on the customer's irrigation knowledge
and management practices. Water efficient landscape programs, though difficult to predict water savings,
should be a component of an aggressive ongoing water conservation program.
Single Family Landscape Water Use
In order to attempt to establish a baseline for landscape water use in single family residences, staff
utilized an analysis performed by the Finance Department prior to the implementation of mandatory water
conservation in April 1989. This analysis indicated that during the summer months (April through
October) an average of 29 units of water (748 gallons per unit) were consumed per household.
Estimating that 40% of this water was used for landscape irrigation equates to 800 acre feet per year for
landscape use. Using an estimated water savings of 30% from irrigation efficiency measures would
V-14 City of San Luis Obispo
- APPENDIX V
equate to a potential savings of 240 acre feet per year from a single family irrigation efficiency program
for the irrigation period. Using similar methodology for winter irrigation, an additional 27 of/year of
water savings can be achieved for a total of 267 af/year. This assumes that all landscapes and irrigation
systems are currently inefficient and can be improved to meet the projdcted water savings goal.
Table 9 summarizes the results of the single family landscape water use analysis.
Commercial and Institutional Landscape
Water Use LANDSCAPE-Single Family
Estimated Water Savings
Additional water savings can be achieved in the
commercial and institutional sectors but are more Summer Irrigation Use 800 afy
difficult to identify. For instance, City parks Winter Irrigation Use 62 afy
consume large quantities of water because of the TOS 862 afy
large amount of turf acreage. Water
Conservation and Parks Division staff have 30% reduction due to
audited all of the major turf areas and found that irrigation efficiency
the irrigation schedules used by the City were Summer 240 afy
more efficient than the schedules recommended Winter 27 afy
by irrigation professionals. This coupled with Total 267 afy
the capital improvements currently under way, an
additional 30% reduction from efficiency TOTAL savings
measures may not be possible. Further research due to irrigation efficiency 267 afy
and analysis will be required to establish a Table 9
potential water savings for this sector.
Cost Evaluation Summary
Staff has not been able to establish a cost associated with water efficient landscape programs because of
lack of a quantitative data and conclusive studies. Additionally, staff has researched the available
literature and was unable to find examples of landscape programs which would be applicable to San Luis
Obispo. It is recommended that a strong educational program be established and that additional research
be conducted to evaluate the feasibility of a monetary incentive program using a combination of graywater
systems and alternative irrigation technologies. For analysis purposes, the cost of a water efficient
landscape program will accounted for in the public education and water audits components of the various
comprehensive water conservation program alternatives.
Section 6. INFORMATIONAL & EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS Reliability Factor: 2.0
During mandatory water conservation, the informational and educational component of the
water conservation program provided an essential service to our citizens by offering educational materials
and assistance on how to save water. Though water planning professionals agree these types of programs
are necessary to promote water efficiency, quantitative data is not available to predict reliable water
savings. Because reliable water savings cannot be determined, cost of such support programs should be
factored into the total cost of an over-all water conservation program.
City of San Luis Obispo V-15
APPENDIX V
During mandatory water conservation, the City had a very comprehensive public relations program which
included the following:
Public Workshops
In-school programs
Media advertising & promotion
Water efficient landscape awareness/plant tagging program
Demonstration garden development (City parks)
Public event participation
Consumer product information
Indoorlirrigation water audits
Free printed information
Of these components, only water audits and printed information are currently offered upon request due
to budget and staff reductions.
Cost Evaluation Summary
Staff has not been able to determine a water savings value to perform a cost per acre foot analysis. As
with water efficient landscape programs, the cost of educational and information programs will be
accounted for in the various comprehensive water conservation program alternatives.
V-16 City of San Luis Obispo
APPENDIX V
EXHIBIT A
City of San Luis Obispo
WATER CONSERVATION TECHNOLOGIES EVALUATION SUMMARY
rmlimatedProgram cost per Reliability
Water Savings
Cost Acre Foot Factor
1. Ultra-Low Flush Toilets (ULF 935 afy 4.5
Alternative A $2.37 million $255/af
Alternative B $3.9 million $420/af
2. Low Flow Showerheads 300 afy included in included in 3.5
ULFT program ULFT program
3. Graywater Systems 336 afy 2,0
Alternative A $5 million $1,500/af
Alternative B $15 to$18 million $4,460-
$5,41 0/af
4,460-
$5,410/af
4. Hot Water Recirculating 40 to 105 afy 1.0
Systems
Alternative A $1.6 million $1,500/af
Alternative B $1.9 million $1,785/af
5. Landscape Programs 267 afy unknown unknown 2.0
6. Information & Educational unknown unknown unknown 2.0
Programs
TOTAL ESTIMATED D
WATER SAVINGS 1,943 AFY
City of San Luis Obispo V-17
- APPENDIX V
EXHIBIT B-1
City of San Luis Obispo
WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAM ALTERNATIVES
The four alternatives shown below project program costs and estimate potential water savings. In addition,
a reliability factor has been established based on staffs evaluation of the various programs and technologies.
The over-all program costs assume that the City continues to use monetary incentives as a means to promote
water-efficent technologies,allocate funds for education and informational programs and provide support
for the level of staffing recommended in the alternatives. It is important to recognize the assumptions used
to determine the estimates are based on past experiences during mandatory water rationing. The identified
financial commitment is the potential long term costs during the planning period(20 years).
The water savings estimates are based on reduced demand from the previous high water use period from
1986 through 1987. Exhibit B-1 is a summary of the detailed program information provided in Exhibit B-2-
165 Gallons/ 155 Gallons/ 145 Gallons/ 130 Gallons/
Person/DayPenson/Day Person/Day Person/Day
Total Staffing, Program $305,080 $597,400 $1,172,400 $2,7.25,200
and Other Costs
Estimated Water Savings 1,070 1,695 2,325 3,265
(in acre feet)
Cost per Acre Foot $285 $352 $504 $935
(acre feet per year)
Composite Reliability Factor 5.0 4.5 2.5 2.5
V-18 City of San Luis Obispo
APPENDIX V
EXMIT B-2
City of San Luis Obispo
WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAM ALTERNATIVES
165 Gallons/ 155 Gallons/ 145 Gallons/ 130 Gallons/
Person/ Person/Day Person/Day Person/Day
STAFFING 2 3 4 5
Water Conservation Coordinator x x x X
Water Conservation Specialist x x x X
Water Conservation Special ���` '' '`(,�.;3 ;'""�` x X
Specialist K� ;..» ;�� >'•�`%i.§ .:
Water Conservation Specialist
y •�.�s, a ai�a..vva,,.m
Office Assistant x
Total Annual Staffing Costs(see Exhibit B-3) $102,180 $135,000 $180,000 $219,800
PROGRAMS
Retrofit rebate $137,500 $237,000 $237,000 $390,000
Water Offset current level t.. ■••
Retrofit Upon Sale $400 $400 $400 $400
Public Education/Information
Media promotion&advertising $25,000 $35,000 $45,000 $60,000
Brochures and publications $10,000 $10,000 $15,000 $15,000
Workshops/public events $5,000 $10,000
Water Audits •et *,t ttt ttt
Code enforcementfmigation audits ••• •+• t*• t+t
Other Water Efficiency Programs
Hot water recirculating systems
"'•`v""'^?«>`s:; a. '>: $160,000 $190,000
n'(;a:�R:;ji>:;:.i$:+];s 8R:::• i;:itij .::ic»:
knv::a: .,;i
&z>v .^%">' $1,800,000
Graywater systems ;;..;;,y .>.tn> $150,000 $500,000
Total Identified Programs Costs(see Note 1) $172,900 $432,400 $962,400 $2,465,400
OTHER: Office Supplies,Training
Tota/Other $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $40,000
TOTAL STAFFING,PROGRAM&OTHER COSTS $305,080 $597,400 $1,172,400 $2,725,200
Notes:
1/ WATER CONSERVATION TECHNOLOGIES 1-A,2,5,6 1-A,2,5,6& 1-A,2,3-A,4-A,5,6 1-B,2,3-B,4-B,5,6
included in costs(see detail in Exhibit A) Pilot for 3
2/ *•*Indicates costs are included in other line items.
3/ Shading indicates particular component not included in this alternative.
City of San Luis Obispo V-19
APPENDIX V
EXH[BIT B-3
City of San Luis Obispo
WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAM ALTERNATIVES - Staffing Analysis
165 Gallons/ 155 Gallons/ 145 Gallons/ 130 Gallons/
Person/Day Person/Day Person/Day Person/Day
TASK DESCRIPTION Hours per week
1. Interior/exterior/low 10 20 25 35
income water audits.
2. Customer Incentive Program 10 10 25 25
3. Retrofit Upon Sale Program 15 15 20 20
4. Water Offset Program 5 10 10 10
5. Public Information and 10 10 10 25
education.
6. Program Development, 15 25 25 35
Education&Administration.
7. General Customer Service 10 15 25 25
8. Water Waste Code 5 15 20 25
Enforcement/Irrigation Audits.
TOTAL HOURS PER WEEK 80 120 160 200
FULL-TIME EQUIVALENTS 2 3 4 5
V-20 City of San Luis Obispo
APPENDIX VI
WATER FUND RATE REVIEW
September 7, 1993
City of San Luis Obispo vi-1
�Illu�" �IIII IVtllu MEETING
city of San L...I S OBI SPO
` COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT REM NUMBER:
FROM: William C. Statler, Director of Finance
Prepared by: Linda Asprion, Revenue Nlanager� 'i
SUBJECT: WATER FUND RATE REVIEW
CAO RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution increasing water rates by eight and one-half percent (8.5%) effective
October 1, 1993 and six and one-half percent (6.5%) effective July 1, 1994.
DISCUSSION
Overview
On June 1, 1993, Council examined the Water Fund rate review recommending a six percent
(6%) rate increase and determined that additional time and analysis was required to ensure
appropriate groundwater claim costs and capital expenditures were properly assessed. This
report analyzes the revenue requirements of the Water Fund based on the predicted 1992-93
revenues and expenditures, approved 1993-95 Financial Plan, and the potential groundwater
claim costs.
An additional factor included in this analysis is the timing of the proposed rate increase.
With the proposed rate increase not being in effect from July through September,when the
City experiences 30% of the total annual water sales, the Water Fund loses 30% of the
revenue generated from the increase. Based upon these factors an eight and one-half
percent (8.5%) rate increase is recommended effective October 1, 1993. It should be noted
that this proposed rate increase will not retain the Water Fund at the required 20%
unreserved fund balance status by year-end 1993-94, although this level will be achieved by
the end of the 1993-95 Financial Plan period.
It should be noted that rates were last adjusted for revenue purposes in June of 1990; if
adopted, the proposed rate increase will reflect a modest adjustment in rates after almost
three and one-half years since their last increase.
Water Rate Review Objectives
As adopted by the Council in May of 1988, the City's rate review should accomplish the
following objectives:
■ Comply with legal requirements '
■ Ensure revenue adequacy to fully meet system operating and capital needs
■ Encourage conservation
■ Provide equity and fairness between classes of customers
■ Be easy to understand by our customers and easy to administer
■ Provide for ongoing review in order to facilitate rate stability
city of san OBISPO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
This review of the Water Fund has been performed with these goals and philosophy in
mind. Provided in Exhibit 1 is a summary projection of revenues, expenditures and changes
in financial position for the Water Fund through fiscal year 1996-97, with the assumptions
used in this financial position projection detailed in Exhibit 2. The additional anticipated
costs of the groundwater claim have been shown with the approved 1993-95 capital
improvement plan for the Water Fund in Exhibit 3. Support for the water service revenue
projections is presented in Exhibit 4, detailing the projected consumption at the various
conservation levels and the projected revenue.
Based upon this analysis, an eight and one-half percent (8.5%) rate increase for revenue
purposes is proposed effective October 1, 1993. This proposed increase is higher than the
six percent (6%) rate increase originally proposed in June of 1993 because of two factors:
■ Groundwater claim costs have added an additional $800,000 in expenditures.
■ Deferring implementation of a water rate increase from July to October reduced the
originally proposed rate increase revenue by 30% or approximately $107,000. This
reduction is based on analysis indicating that between July and September the City
uses 30% of its annual water consumption.
IIt should be noted that this Water Fund projection indicates that during fiscal year 1993-94,
unreserved fund balance will be expended in order to complete capital projects and that at
year-end the unreserved fund balance is projected to fall below the 20% requirement.
However, this Water Fund projection, which includes a six and one-half percent (6.5%) rate
increase in 1994-95, indicates that at fiscal year-end 1994-95 the unreserved fund balance
will meet the 20% requirement.
Rate Setting Methodology
In determining water.rate revenue requirements and setting recommended rates, the
following general methodology is used:
Step 1: Determine Water Fund revenue requirements for:
■ Operations and maintenance
■ Capital improvements and replacements
■ Debt service obligations (existing and projected)
Step 2: Subtract from this amount "non-rate revenues" such as:
■ Interest earnings
■ Connection fees and meter sales
■ Sale of electricity from hydroplant operations
■ Revenues from other agencies (Cuesta/Cal Poly)
■ Other service charges (service start-up fees, late charges, returned
check charges)
MINE city of san _ _.is OBlspo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Step 3: Identify water rate requirements.
Revenue to be generated from water rates is the difference between water
revenue requirements (Step 1) and "non-rate" revenues (Step 2).
Step 4: Determine new rates.
Model the rate base (consumption and customer account assumptions)against
the existing rate structure and rate requirements identified in Step 3.
Because we perform this analysis over a multi-year period, other factors are considered such
as fund balances available to support capital projects, debt service coverage requirements,
and minimum fund balance policy.
Summary of Key Assumptions
Based upon the assumptions in Exhibit 2 and the three factors discussed above-, the financial
position projections indicate that water rates require an increase of 8.5% in 1993-94 and
6.5% in 1994-95. The following is a summary of key assumptions for expenditures and
revenues:
■ Annual decrease in water conservation from 1987 levels over the next three years
ranging from 30% in 1993-94 to 20% in 1995-96, with 1996-97 remaining at a 20%
conservation level.
s Operations and maintenance as approved in the 1993-95 Financial Plan with an
inflation rate of 4% thereafter.
■ Debt service for the water treatment plant is based upon the 1993 Water Revenue
Bond payment schedule.
■ Rate increases for other agencies who receive their water from the City. The City
has signed agreements with both Cal Poly and Cuesta.
■ Water customer growth rate at less than 1% until 1996-97. This projection
corresponds with the assumptions used in the March 13, 1993 Budget Workshop.
■ Capital improvement charges are estimated as a percentage of the 'base projection"
of $688,400 which is the estimated amount of fees that would be collected at a 1%
growth rate. These revenues are then discounted by 87% due to the retrofit credit
currently in place, which is projected to be discontinued with the construction of the
Salinas Reservoir expansion.
■ Connection and meter charges are projected at the inflation rate.
■ Service start-up fees in the amount of $25 to be effective October 1, 1993. The
revenue from this fee has been prorated for 1993-94 to reflect the lost revenue from
July through September. Future years anticipate revenues of $75,000 annually.
MY Of San IwS OBISPO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
■ Expansion of Salinas Reservoir is estimated to cost $1,300,000 for study and design
during the 1993-95 Financial Plan period. Construction is projected for 1995-96 with
an annual debt service of $700,000 under existing market conditions for the $8
million construction project.
■ The water reclamation program has not been included in these projections as there
is insufficient information on cost versus revenues to include in this analysis.
■ The cost of receiving water from Nacimiento is not included in these projections as
preliminary cost estimates are unavailable.
As reflected above, these assumptions do not include two anticipated projects - water
reclamation and Nacimiento. It should be noted that the cost of these projects would not
affect water rates for 1993-94, although they could impact future water rate increases as
necessary to cover additional debt service or operating requirements. As plans and
specification for these projects are prepared, any required modifications to existing
projections for future rate increases will be reviewed and presented.
FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed 8.5% and 6.5% rate increases will (rounded to the nearest five cents) affect
the monthly water rates as follows:
Current Proposed Rates Proposed Rates
Rates October 1. 1993 July 1. 1994
1 to 5 ccf $2.25 per ccf $2.45 per ccf $2.60 per ccf
over 5 ccf $2.80 per ccf $3.05 per ccf $3.25 per ccf
ccf = one hundred cubic feet
Based upon the consumption of the average residential'customer at 30% conservation from
1987 consumption (which is the conservation rate used in the Water Fund analysis for 1993-
94), the proposed rate increase effective October 1, 1993 will increase the monthly water
bill as follows:
Current Proposed
Water Bill Water Bill Difference
9 ccf $22.45 $24.45 $2.00
Exhibit A
RATES FOR WATER SERVICE
Monthly water service charges per hundred cubic feet of water (ccf) used per dwelling unit
for accounts classified as residential by the director of finance and per account for all other
users, are as follows:
Commodijy Charges Per CCF
Effective October 1, 1993 Inside City Outside City
Construction Site Meters
0 to 1 ccf $ 2.45 $ 4.90
In excess of 1 ccf thereafter $160.00 $325.00
All Others
1 to 5 ccf $ 2.45 $ 4.90
More than 5 ccf $ 3.05 $ 6.10
Commodity Charges Per CCF
Effective July 1, 1994 Inside City Outside City
Construction Site Meters Only
0 to 1 ccf $ 2.60 $ 5.20
In excess of 1 ccf thereafter $170.00 $345.00
All Others
1 to 5 ccf $ 2.60 $ 5.20
More than 5 ccf $ 3.25 $ 6.50
ExhlbftmL.
z<•cs. G6 S 8
O a v1 n Cry N p .moi f�1 p N O n
V1
N "' tqo
w x;p
L5 � g 8 8 8 0 � p
�, N„ NS S S g
�I•�
%O N [� [� N ~ N Ph N O N .-.
s ;
V1 \p
? > 8 0 8 8 9 9 9VL
S 825 8 $ �S o ols 8 8 S
3 8 n 00
n N h N n c°s n 008 N cV y1/�� d• 0�i
rn N in in
:.:'p7�1:�:"s?:��i:ay �p OO' v
.ZIj:�:;�,,�(� •-• � Op N N v] N p� � O �r1 cp lV e+'1 ..r .
Q V N .-. rz
mt C-4
N NCD
en
00
O� O �O 00 pp
l` N O �D 00 C14 O
<5::::::i•,..'v. N O h 'sT [� ..-. 1 1 .-w 00 [� N v �1 (� f�7 O�
O�♦p �p v N '�' C1
h t+'1
` � S 8885
tn
LL
czW v e+i .°Oo M 8 0000 Q v eh o v n c�
}it}
W
Od
51
C-i Cy U fCj ~j OU.
LL 7 U U
�D C y v v tq y
Y:i:r :3:x5„” Q " e0 C k, g 7 •C 7 b y u W3 �e R
ikr:c CL. � V U
cc
W vn c E o a y `� O o y o
a C ,'G
ccii = `� $ C� cg x `�i 0 v O C� A v O a v ca CA u
Exhibit _
CC) IT ma7 O O °e O Nto
0) CV (n0 n O N •- O a O
69 69 fa 69
C
O
.N
C
m
m co
e N C O C
N a n co N t` n N O
� � m
y
W
¢
c
C C
m
0) -O O O O i6 C
1 e O-qt Ln N O O \ m O
0)i N O m Lf) 69 1p(') N N O 00 N O t m U
O) < a7 f� p W N V7 V
¢ fa 64 69 0 0 0 c
O
01 m Oc N A
d et V O C
m 3
'O O O QO E m O 0 p co C
I a° N p m 3S a a$ N N U O eG
M O co O a7 O 6% O O N O N 7 m L m C O.
N co
rn m r: co . a; m ° R m :: m E
Z Q ea is v� m m yrs c m O
caca
C N V
O C
F— ca = � ; �
LL D ,^ ` m m c
a c
m a� m c _ Lo m
U 10 E � O •° map X'
O. U C Q G w d d p U
o U Cm
• y m U O A C C Z
l=1. o .Q a `v o m = .a) " d
CL E m N `o L V 3 m > a v p
_ _
e, �+ m m co C
W w w m m m 'n 3 3 m t m N
m ¢ c o
C yy
Q O ¢ Ch m r y m 'O `- m N L d
LU rl o rn a. c m m �, m 3 o c
CC < rn io � m in a v d a o m a a
Q V > r' E `o 0 ayi 2 m m c; 3 00 m im Lo a E
LL —m v m o LM
m ¢ m m m0 :3 c U ao
00 cac c c `n U c v v .0 o m c t a of
m m c m c `o
o c x m x a� m a¢i m cc o. > U E 'o o
,o w 3 w E v m r= `m o 3 > v CO
d 2 I I I ¢ m > > ani ¢ c m H v > >
m as m m m o o a; �- o c m e ° °� avi m m
(� U U C E I
U ° aZi aZi m ¢ U E c °' �' ° '� `-Q oO/�i ° m a
i0 to co co A _O m 7 co O 0 O N
N m m m '� d ?: Z > m s 0
CL d m ami t io m `—° m O z 0 U o m E
3 0 0 0 0 0 v ¢ C
Exhibit
J
F
O O O O O O O
O OOO0 �O � • O 00 O ON
0NNN0
0 49 M 0
Oj 49 69 69 49 69 Cj EA k
ff? 49 .—
b► '
m Q) O O. O O O
0 �0 I O O O O O
O
0 4CM
69 0 �0t1 cM0
� 0
a
6A 49
'K
Q d Co o 0 0 0 0 0 0
z o 0 0 0 0 0 m Coo
0 O O. O O N N
LL °' as49 69 ai
49
C�
W
Q �
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
00 0 0 0 0 0
2 in
69
H
r
p � � 00000000 0 0S0
O O 00 0 O 0 00 00 O O O O
LL a � o 0 0 0 0: ui o c cri o o ui
a O O O O 0 0 u> O N N N N
Z Q C`J 6H CV 49 49 69 6% (D C O Co N
^� to � �
CL
Z
W
C C
c m
W
/ _0 c to
0
p
Z 0 iwrr aci
m m
oa c ' a QX
tO>IL a Q cco
c
G CO a u: a c E °' E ° a 0 0 > 0 a
w x m 0 m m y a E 2 U Q 0)
O w > .m0 0o c � E c E 0 I
--� o m m a �0- m a,
m
r m � O a � m E U li o
LL ¢ I s O O Cc
N 3 �
tv aci c m in Y .0 •E 5 m
c E m m .c c c U 1/a�
7 N
U ° to
0 o
Exhibit.L
7 O N 0 t0 co N N 10 co 1
N C (O m
'COD n
' O T T N 44).
f0
°f U
rn
A
0
N
U)
Z O O O O O N N N 001
O •Q O N O T (Ni cd T T N
_ T m � f9 69 10 , CD
001 U N O v N O mma 0 l(1 C T T N 69 6A9
V OD O
WT O
N
O (a)
CL
CN O O O O l0 In 01
W N f00 f0 N v m C
t0 .N- COIces .T- O fR � ,ANO 001
Z W H O c9 v mA C NJ}j
W I T T NC\T v! 4% Pi
W TN
�Nl
c v 0 m
0 N
a T R
N co
Zm T O O O It,0N N 1 Z N N 'V� R
O) 1
T0) ITC\iC\L O i 01 N N
cr)M OCO� N �O N 0 O
01 C d m
ZO O T T N tN9 NN9 LffO`
_O QU C,
46
�J C C V O O
E C m C IA
D a
U) 0
U) $ E
Z U) Ln o
O 7 N C m
V T «� 7 =
a
U a m 3
E ~ A U C
C i m 1p 7 r V
W
1—' U j 0 V m N U 7 IA U O O 00 O ^)
c o u+i + a0i � + > > m a`
U a` ou1 0) UU T o
2 , t : Z
APPENDIX VII
IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS
City of San Luis Obispo VII-1
WATER DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES Appendix VII
OVERVIEW
The purpose of this Appendix is to set forth an approach for funding water system improvements that is consistent
with the City's policy that new development pay its fair share of the cost of building the facilities necessary to serve
it. In this analysis,impact fees are the recommended method for achieving this financing goal.
On an"equivalent dwelling unit"basis,the proposed fees for water supply projects range from$5,243 to$12,568,
with a mid—range cost of$7,245. This cost range results from the variablity in the cost of sources that may be
developed in meeting the City's long—term water supply needs as well as cost ranges for each specific project.
Given these potential cost variances,this analysis presents water supply development costs in three cost ranges:low,
middle,and high.
Upon adoption of the Urban Water Management Plan,it is recommended that the water supply portion of the
City's water impact fee be initially set at the"mid—range"level($7,245). As water supply projects and related costs
become better known,fee amounts can be modified as appropriate.
In addition to water supply costs,the City's existing water impact fee also includes a component for the cost of
water treatment facilities. This analysis addresses this component of the water impact fee using the same
methodology for apportioning costs between existing users and new development as used in determining the supply
portion. Based on these two components and the equivalent dwelling unit concept,this analysis concludes with
recommended water impact fees for residential and non—residential users.
SUMMARY OF THE FINANCING METHODOLOGY
There are six basic steps in developing recommended water impact fees:
A. Determine water supply needs and allocate them between existing users and new development based on:
1. projected water demand at General Plan build—out
2. reserve requirements
3. loss of supply capacity in reservoirs due to siltation
B. Identify source of supply solutions that will meet the City's needs over the next 30 years
C. Determine the costs of developing these additional water supplies on an annual basis
D. Allocate these costs between existing users and new development
E. Develop appropriate funding strategies in financing new water supply projects
1. development impact fees for costs related to new development
2. general purpose rate increases for costs related to existing users
F. Set water impact fees for both supply and treatment facilities attributable to new development for residential
and non—residential users based on"equivalent dwelling units"
KEY ASSUMPTIONS
The accompanying schedules detail the recommended funding strategy based on the following key assumptions
General Plan
• build—out population of 56,000
• 1% annual growth rate
• new development must pay its fair share of the facility costs necessary to serve it
Water Supply and Demand
• demand based on 145 gallons per day per capita;this reflects both residential and non—residential uses
• current safe annual yield of 7,735 acre feet
• reliability reserve of 2,000 acre feet annually and siltation allowance of 500 acre feet annually
• specific water sources are not allocated between existing users and new development based on the City's
multi—source water policy
VII-2
Anoendia VII
Step A
TEW WATER SUPPLY PROJECTIONS
fhe following three tables outline the City's additional water supply requirements and allocates them
between existing users and new development on a prorata basis. As set forth in this analysis,the City needs to
develop a safe annual yield of an additional 3,861 acre feet(af)annually;of this amount, 1,255 of(32.5%)is
attributable to existing users and 2,606 of(67.5%) is attributable to new development. These three tables:
O Project demand based on a per capita planning ratio of 14-5gallons per dayper capita for e)dsting users and
new development
® Determine new water supply requirements based on:current safe annual yields;projected demand based
on per capita planning ratios;reserve requirements,and siltation allowance
® Allocatenewwater supply requirements between ebi ting users and new development
Projected Demand Based on Per Gapita Planning Ratio Table Al
Annual AF'@ '
145 gal:per.day. Percent
:Po ulatioa " erca ita. : , of total-
Existing users 43,415 7,052 77.5%
New development 12 585 2,044 22.5%u
Total 1 56,0001 9,0961 100.0%
New Water Supply Requirements Table A2
Required safe annual yield 9,096
Current safe annual yield 7,735
4dditional safe annual yield required based on per capita planning ratio 1,361
deliability reserve 2,000
Siltation allowance 500
Total 3,861
Allocation of New Supply Requirements Between Ekislin Users and New Development Table A3
Existing, "' - :New:
See:aores : Users -:Develo meatTotal:
New supplies based on per capita planning ratio (a) (683) 2,044 1,361
Reliability reserve (b) 1,551 449 2,000
Siltation allowance b 388 112 500
Total 1 1.2551 2,606 3,861
Percent 1 32.5% 1 67.5% 1 100.0%
a) Credir allocated to existing development based on current safe annual yield in excess of current demand(77.5 of vs 7052 al)
b.) Reliability and siltation reserve allocated to existing users based on their ratio to total projected demand(77.5%)
Step B
SOURCE OF SUPPLY SOLUTIONS
The following identifies three combined sources in meeting the City's additional supply requirements. As plans for
individual projects go forward and further environmental,engineering and financial studies are completed,the
actual composition of supply sources is likely to vary. This specific combination of supply sources has been initially
evaluated as it is likely to be the least costly combination of sources based on information available at this time.
Safe Annual Yields SA from Conceptual Source of Supply Solutions Table B
AF SAY:
ialinas Reservoir expansion(1650 of say less 100 acre feet for County WW District No 6) 1,550
Water reclamation distribution system 1,000
Nacimiento pipeline 1,311
Total 3 861
VII-3
Aauendix VII
Step C
- COST OF NEW WATER SUPPLIES
This schedule develops annualized costs for the new water supply sources. Based on the variability of supply
combinations and cost ranges associated with each one,three cost estimates are developed: low, middle,and high.
The annual costs for each supply project have been developed as follows:
Salinas Reservoir
The low and mid-range cost estimates are based on projected debt service requirements for a 30 year bond issue
with a project cost ranging from$8.0 to$9.8 million. There is no"high"cost range for this project,as the more
expensive option would be to develop the 1,550 acre feet that would result from this project through the Nacimiento
pipeline project instead
Water Reclamation Distribution System
The cost ranges are based on estimated debt service requirements on a 30 year bond issue for a project costing
between$4.0 to$8.0 million based on the estimates provided in the draft EIR for this project.
Nacimiento Pipeline
Cost ranges for the Nacimiento pipeline project are not based on differing construction cost estimates,but on
differing assumptions regarding the apportionment of cost components(supply vs treatment - capital vs
operations &maintenance). These different apportionment approaches are reflected in the"low,middle,or high"
cost ranges summarized as follows based on preliminary annual cost per acre foot information developed by the
County's engineering consultants for this project,Boyle Engineering.
Table G1
Supply:
Pehne Treatzttent Total:
Facilities (annual debt service) 522 113 635
Operations&Maintenance O&M 302 63 365
Total $824 $176 $1000
• 'Low cost range"is based on the facility cost of the pipeline($522 per acre foot)
• "Middle cost range"is based on the facility cost of the pipeline and treatment plant($635 per acre foot)
• "High cost range"is based on total facility and O&M costs($1,000per acre foot)
Conservation
Although the direct effect of an aggressive conservation program is to lower demand requirements,its costs are
treated as a "supply"project since it reduces the amount of new water supplies that would otherwise have to be
developed. Cost ranges for conservation have been based on the analysis presented in Appendix V of this plan.
Summary of Annual Costs for New Water Supplies Tab1e G2
ost Rau' e .
Low .. " Middle Hi
Salinas Reservoir expansion 640,000 784,000
Water reclamation distribution system 320,000 480,000 640,000
Nacimiento pipeline 684„300 832,500 2,861,000
Conservation 1 305,100 597 400 1 172 400
Total $1949 400 $2 693 900 $4.973,Q
Step D
ALLOCATION OF COSTS BETWEEN EXISTING USERS AND NEW DEVELOPMENT
The following schedule allocates the costs of developing new supplies between existing users and new development
based on the apportionment of costs developed in Table A_3:
Table D
Percent :. Cost:<Ranite.
of TotalLow Middled Hi
Existing users .3259o' 633,500 875,5001 1,518,800
New development 675% 1315 900 1,818,4001 3,154,600
TOTAL 100.0% $1949 400 $2,693.900 $4 673 400
vlt-4
.. y
Appendix VII
Step E
"UNDING STRATEGIES
The following schedules identify separate strategies for funding the costs of new water supplies for existing users
and new development.
0 New Development
The use of impact fees is the primary method identified in this analysis for funding the portion of new water
supplies related to new development. Several steps are involved in setting impact fees at appropriate levels:
• Identify"equivalent Impact fees are attributable to residential as well as non-residential uses. The
dwelling units"(EDU"s) concept of equivalent dwelling units is a useful one in allocating costs between
different types of uses by establishing a"common denominator"based on a single
family residential dwelling. As set forth in the summary below, residential EDU's
are based on existing single and mulit-family units and 1990 Census data for
population per household. Based on 18,300 total dwelling units,this results in
16,340 exisiting residential EDU's.
• Project annual Based on 16,340 existing residential EDU's,annual increases are projected at 1%
increases in per the City's General Plan growth management policies. This results in an
residential EDU's increase of 163 residential EDU's per year over the next 30 years.
• Project annual Non-residential uses currently account for 35% of total water consumption;the
increases in non- annual growth in non-residential EDU's is projected proportionately,resulting in
residential ED U's an additional 88 EDU's annually, for a total increase in EDU's per year of 251.
-he following table summarizes projected annual increases in equivalent dwelling units:
Annual Growth in Equivalent Dwellin Units ED U's Table Er
Existing PopPer SFRAnnual EDU;
Units ': Household - E uivalent I ED.U.'.s: :Growth 16/0
Single family residential(SFR) 8,500 2.7 1.0 8,500 85
Multi-familiy residential 9.8001 2.1 0.8 7,840 78
Total residential 163
Total non-residential @ 35% of total water use 88
Total estimated annual growth in equivalent dwelling units 251
The next step in determining impact fees is to match the annual cost requirements for water supply improvements
related to new development(Step D)with the estimated annual growth in EDU's:
Water Supply Impact Fee Requirement Table E.2
Annual Cost.::.: SFR Fee @'
Re uirement 251;EDU.'s.
Low Cost Range $1,315,900 $5,243
Middle Cost Range 1,818,400 7,245
High Cost Range 3,154,600 12_MMMMMjM68
This analysis results in an EDU impact fee ranging from$5,243 to$12,568,with a mid-point of$7,245. This
compares with the current impact fee for supply purposes (exclusive of the treatment plant portion)of$2,416. A
summary of proposed fees based on mid-range costs including both supply and treatment components for
residential and non-residential users is provided at the end of this Appendix
.! Existing Users
The balance of the cost of developing new water supplies that is attributable to existing users must be financed
through general purpose water rates. The following summarizes projected rate increases necessary to do so:
VII-5
Appendix VII
Pro'ected Increases in General Purpose Water Rates Table E.3
:
Annual 'Rate,
.:Re uirement Increase.
Low Cost Range $633,500 7.7%
Middle Cost Range 875,500 10.6%
High Cost Range 1518 800 18.4%
` Based on projected rate base revenues of$8,25000 in 1996-97 perJune 6,1994 water rate analysis(assumes 20%conservation)
As reflected above,funding the portion of water supply improvements related to existing users will require general
purpose rate increases ranging from about 8%v to 18%u,with a mid—range estimate of about 11%. The following
summarizes the cost impact of these potential increases on the"average"single family residential customer:
Impact on "Average"Single Family Customer
Avera a monthly bill @ 10 bH&g units per month — ro ected rates in 1996-97 Table E4
Billing. $ Increase;.
Without allocated share of source of supply projects $28.46 $ --
Low Cost Range 30.65 2.19
Middle Cost Range 31.48 3.02
High Cost Ran e . 33.70 5.24
Step F
RECOMMENDED WATER DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
As noted above,water development impact fees are composed of two components:supply and treatment facilities
related to servicing new development. Using the same methodolgy used in developing the supply portion of
the water impact fee,the following identifies the treatment facilities portion of the recommended fee:
Annual Water Treatment Facility Costs
Attributable to New Development Table F.1
• Annual debt service requirements for water treatment
improvements curently under construction $752,000
• Portion attributable to new development(22.5%) 169 000
• Cost per EDU @ 251 EDU's annually $6Z3
Based on the portion of"mid—range"cost of water supply improvements as well as debt service requirements for
improvements to the City's water treatment plant currently underway that are attributable to new development,the
following impact fees are recommended for residential and non—residential uses:
Recommended Water Impact Fee Schedule Table F.2
DU's:. Fee
Residential
Single family residential 1.0 $7,918
Duplex,townhouse,condominium or apartment 0.8 6,334
Mobile home 0.6 4,751
Non—residential based on meter size
5/8 or 3/4 inches 1.0 7,918
1 inch 2.0 15,836
11/2 inches 4.0 31,672
2 inches 6.4 50,675
3 inches 14.0 110,851
4 inches 22.0 174,194
6 inches 45.01 356,307
Residential eg uivalencies are based on 1990 Census population er household data
Single family residential 2.7
Duplex,townhouse,condominium or apartment 22
Mobile home 1.7
VII-6
MEVG AGENDA
DAI L ITEM #_..L� l
To: San Luis Obispo City Council October 27, 1994
1�.. .. ,.:� :__._"�_ CDD dIq�
From: En%'ironmental Quality Task Force �/. .. -
❑ FIN DIR
❑ FIRE CHIEF
Subject: EQTF Recommendations Summary and Recommendations::'' r, P;LAdi nI-
Report to the Council on water policies and projects. �' �L, _cH�
Background �/'° _ , _!_ter
Part of the Council's charge to the EQTF was to provide
recommendations to the City on water policies and projects, as the
Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), Water Reuse Project
(previously called the Water Reclamation Project), Salinas Reservoir
Expansion Project, and other water supply projects, as conservation,
ground water, and Nacimiento Project. We had preliminarily made
some of these recommendations in our 3/9/94 letter and
attachments to the Council. These attachments included the EQTF's
two 3/6/94 documents to you titled DRAFT URBAN WATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN (UWMP) and DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED SALINAS RESERVOIR EXPANSION
PROJECT. However, this report is a necessary update considering
more recent information on City water policies and projects. It was
impossible to get this report to you sooner due to the complexity of -
water issues and summer leave of various EQTF members.
Water policy is one of the most important and complex problems
facing the City. All potential water importation and diversion sources
that the City is studying to date-- Reuse (Reclamation), Salinas, -
Nacimiento-- will have severe, unmitigable adverse impacts
regardless of our best CEQA efforts. This is because even for smaller
cities such as ours, domestic water projects are too massive to
properly mitigate the environmental costs. If nothing else, 20 years
of struggle with CEQA has shown us this dilemma. Only when we
recognize the inevitable, severe environmental consequences of these
types of water projects can we begin to make the best water
decisions for our City.
With the complexity and the environmental severity of water issues
facing the City in mind, the EQTF makes the following
recommendations. to the Council. First is a summary of our
recommendations in the Recommendations Summary followed by -Ax
a discussion of each in the Recommendations Report.
. . ECEIVE-:, .
OCT 2 ; 1994 .
CITY CLERK
OBISPO.
2
Recommendations Summary
Except for the first item, which is an unendorsable recommendation,
the EQTF asks that the City Council endorse the following water issue
recommendations:
1. Reread our letter to you of 3/9/94 (EQTF recommendations to the
Council on the Draft Urban Water Management Plan) and its
attachments, especially EQTF's two documents, each dated 3/6/94.
2. Add to the UWMP in section 2.8 under Ltads far Policy_ the
following fifth official use for new City water supplies:
+ Providing for habitat management, as mitigating, maintaining,
restoring, enhancing, and creating native habitat by allocating
a reasonable specified portion of landscaping water for larger
new public and private developments, by establishing a new
City water policy for this purpose within one year.
3. Modify the 145 gallons per person per day (gppd) planning use
rate to 125 gppd, as the appropriate consensus figure to use for
planning the City's future water needs.
4. In the spirit of the City's water reclamation policy for maintaining
the San Luis Obispo Creek ecosystem (1) provide an effluent flow
release adequate to maintain all of the native fish species in lower
San Luis Obispo Creek, including three-spined stickleback, steelhead,
sculpin, tidewater goby. Pacific lamprey, and speckled dace, and (2) -
prior to certification of the Water Reuse Project EIR,Athe document
will bemedifits to include the above information. rywcWY
5. Hold a hearing within one year to consider purchasing some
surrounding agricultural land for open space and valley wildlife
habitat and importing its water for use within the City.
6. (1) Finish the Environmental Impact Reports on the Water Reuse
and Salinas Reservoir projects and hold them in abeyance without
further official action. (2) Next, finish the EIR on the Nacimiento
Project. (3) Then hold a public City Council site visit to each project
area to avoid the possibility that a paper review ,by itself might
overlook any important environmental consideration. (4) Finally,
review the Environmental Impact Reports of all three water source
3
projects together to ensure coordination for making the right water
and environmental decisions for our City.
Recommendations Report
1. Our first recommendation is that you reread our letter to you of
3/9/94 and its attachments, especially the EQTF's previously
mentioned two, each dated 3/6/94 . We believe this is necessary for
you to have that background for this report and because we do not
try to again cover all that was presented in that earlier letter. This
report is an update and only references the earlier letter when it is
critical to understanding the discussion here.
2. Our second recommendation is a clarification of a recommendation
in our 3/9/94 letter to vou. In that letter we discussed how the draft
UWMP provided only economic uses for City water overlooking the
need for ecological uses. To correct this flaw, in section 2.8 under
Basic for Policy we recommended that the Council add the
following official use. of City water by adding a fifth black bullet
followed by the wording:
Habitat management as, mitigating, maintaining, restoring,
enhancing, and creating habitat. _
Staff thought that EQTF was recommending the City import water
from natural aquatic ecosystems to provide habitat in the City. This
did not make sense to staff as there would be no net gain of habitat,
and likely there would be a. net loss, due to the problems of -
mitigating for water importation projects. In subsequent discussions
with staff we explained our intent is not to import water away from
existing habitat to provide for habitat management in the City.
Instead our intent is, once the City has determined the quantity of
water it needs for buildout, some types of new development
requiring landscaping water will allocate a yet-to-be-determined
portion of that landscaping water to native vegetation landscaping,
which has greater benefit to wildlife than exotic vegetation
landscaping.
The wildlife that will benefit from native vegetation landscaping are
small native songbirds, as wrens, warblers, vireos, native sparrows,
orioles, fly catchers, nuthatches, chickadees, etc.. These birds evolved
with native vegetation and are highly attracted to it. They are not as
attracted to exotic vegetation. However, exotic vegetation is readily
4
used by very adaptive pesky species, as house sparrows, starlings,
purple finches, mocking birds, scrub jays, crows, cow birds, and
brewer's black birds. These advantaged pest species then further
out-compete the small songbirds for any remaining natural feeding,
breeding. and nesting sites in the City. Some pest birds (crows, scrub
jays, mocking birds) also eat the eggs and chicks of songbirds. It
becomes difficult for songbirds to survive. If we want to see
songbirds in the City, we can accomplish this by setting a goal of
emphasizing native over exotic landscaping vegetation in some types
of new City development. This will not only provide extra habitat for
songbirds. some of which are becoming rare, but will also avoid
giving the pesky birds too much of an initial advantage over them.
The EQTF stresses that we are not advocating requiring native
vegetation landscaping on small new infill residential and business
sites. Instead we are recommending a reasonable proportion of
native vegetation landscaping for new public facilities and parks and
new larger commercial, industrial, and residential developments. .
Staff asked the EQTF to clarify this in writing, which we are now
doing by recommending that the Council add in section 2.8 under
Basi_for Policy the fifth black bullet followed by this clarified
wording -
Providing for habitat management, as mitigating, maintaining,
restoring. enhancing, and creating native habitat by allocating a
reasonable specified portion of landscaping water for larger new
public and private developments, by establishing a new water -
policy for this purpose within one year.
3. Our third recommendation addresses the Council's endorsement of
five water conservation issues at its public hearing 7/20/94 on the
UWMP. The EQTF supports the last 4 of the 5 water conservation
decisions that the Council made that night. These are: (1) require
retrofitting at a 2:1 ratio, (2) hold in reserve water for intensification
and infill development, (3) recover cost of new water supplies
necessary for development through impact fees, and (4) require
Chapter 2 of the UWMP to be the Water Element of the General Plan.
However, the EQTF does not support the first decision the Council
made, which was preliminary endorsement of 145 gallons per person
per day (gppd) as the water use rate to project future water demand.
5
At the hearing staff indicated the use of.. data by the Metropolitan
Water District Of Southern California (MWDOSC) to help justify the
145 gppd. This is the water agency (along with the Bureau of
Reclamation) that drained the lower Colorado River nearly dry and
placed many of its native fish species on the brink of extinction
(bonytail chub, humpback chub, woundfin, Colorado River squawfish,
razorback sucker, etc.) securing municipal water for much of
southern California.
Many smaller towns as ours do not want to emulate MWDOSC and
southern California. We should not be using their data to help
determine what water conservation figures our City should use.
Instead, we should be using the data of other smaller cities, including
our own. To this end considerable good current evidence has recently
been supplied to the City by the Sierra Club (letter to the Council
4/18/94). Pat Veesart (letter to the Council 7/20/94), and others
showing that smaller coastal California cities that practice water
conservation used far below 145 gppd in 1993 (Grover Beach 125
gppd, Morro Bay 125, Monterey 117, Santa Cruz 105, Santa Barbara
104). And the most recent information shows that San Luis Obispo's
- current 1994 use rate is only 108 gppd.
The above small city water conservation figures show that the gppd -
planning figure to establish for our City should be well below 145
gppd. This makes conservation and economic sense. For each 1.0
gppd reduction, our City's citizens will save about $28,900 annually
(1.0 gppd reduction = 0.00112 acre feet saved per person annually x
44,000 City population x $587 cost/acre foot = $28,927 saved -
annually).
In acknowledging the environmental and economic advantages of
reducing our City's water planning use rate, the EQTF recommends a
planning use rate of 125 gppd. Given our City's current use rate of
108 gppd, it is difficult to justify a rate as high as 125 gppd, other
than to say it is a compromise between staff's recommended 145
gppd and our . citizens' current use rate of 108 gppd. Furthermore, it
is evident from the previous economic analysis .that by reducing the
planning use rate from 145 gppd to 125 gppd, at a cost of $587/acre
foot our citizens will save about $578,000 annually (20 gppd
reduction x $28,900 saved annually/1.0 gppd reduction = $578,000
saved annually)! Since $587/acre foot is a midrange estimate by the
City, the cost/acre foot is likely to be greater and the incremental
savings will be proportional to the incremental increase in cost.
6
A final point is that with the adoption of the 125 gppd use rate, the
City eliminates the need for all but one of its 3 major water projects.
At our General Plan buildout of 56,000 people in year 2015, we
would use 7,840 of annually (56,000 people x .140 of per person per
year [equivalent to 125 gppd] = 7,840 of per year). To the 7,840 of
we must add 2,000 of per year for the City's reliability reserve and
500 of for annual siltation, resulting in a total annual water
requirement of 10.340 af. Subtracting the City's 7,735 of safe annual
yield from its total annual water requirement of 10,340 of yields an
additional annual water need at .buildout of 2,605 af. This additional
amount of water can be supplied by just one of the City's proposed
water projects.
4. The EQTF's fourth water recommendation concerns the Water
Reuse (Reclamation) Project. The City's attached water reclamation
policy indicates some of the sewage effluent will be used for
irrigation and some of it will be used for maintaining the San Luis
Obispo Creek ecosystem. It does not say that one use will be
accomplished at the expense of the other. Yet Utility Department
staff have interpreted this to mean maximum water diversion for
irrigation rather than optimum diversion, or balanced diversion, or
some other fair sharing of this water. The problem is maximum -
diversion for irrigation means minimum effluent flow for the Creek,
and that is currently reflected in the draft UWMP and the draft EIR
for the Water Reuse Project.
These documents propose that of the total effluent of about 5.0 cfs, -
4.0 cfs be diverted for irrigation leaving only 1 cfs for the Creek
during the critical summer flow season. Removing this amount of
flow in the winter high flow season would not be a major problem.
However, the Creek ecosystem has had these higher effluent flows
available to it for many years during the hot summer. To drastically
reduce the flows to I cfs in the critical hot summer cannot help but
result in drastic effects to the Creek ecosystem.
To address this problem, in our 3/9/94 letter to you, the EQTF
recommended that you eliminate reference to the 1 cfs flow by
replacing it with the following wording in the UWMP (new wording
underlined; old wording lined out):
The City will continue to discharge to San Luis Obispo Creek .&
flow that has yet to be determined one eubie feet pep see of
7
reclaimed water for aquatic and riparian habitats.
This was not done as section 3.3 under Background of the current
draft UWMP states:
The City proposes to dedicate a release of 1 cubic foot per second
to the maintainance and enhancement of the in-stream habitat of
San Luis Obispo Creek (720 acre-feet per year).
However, at the EQTF's meeting on Friday, 10/7/94, Utility
Department staff stated that in the final draft of the UWMP, which
the Council will soon review for approval, reference to the 1 cfs
release will be deleted. They said that in its place will be a statement
similar to the statement we recommended above. The EQTF supports
this change to the UWMP. But this change to the UWMP still does not
address our primary concern with the I cfs effluent release, which is
the release that continues to be proposed in the second draft EIR on
the Water Reuse Project. That concern is that if a 1 cfs release was
selected, it would not be enough to maintain the Creek ecosystem, let
alone enhance it.
The last paragraph of the initial Instream Flow Study (IFS 9/8/92)
indicated that the 1 cfs was only preliminary and the final -
recommendation should consider other factors, some of which it
listed. Unfortunately, the only factor the initial .IFS used to
tentatively show the adequacy of the 1 cfs was "wetted surface area"
of the Creek bed. Upon reviewing the results of the IFS, the Calif.
Dept. of Fish & Game (CDFG). State Water Resource Control Board -
(SWRCB), and others, including EQTF scientists, did not believe that
by itself wetted surface area of the Creek bed was adequate and
relevant to determine the effluent flow necessary to maintain the
Creek ecosystem. The CDFG and SWRCB stated that other factors that
needed to be included in determining the amount of effluent to
release to maintain the Creek ecosystem were stream flow-velocity,
depth, and substrate. These other factors combined would give a
more reasonable weighted usable area (WUA) index to help
determine the appropriate amount of effluent flow to continue
releasins to the Creek to maintain it.
After more analysis by the flow study consultant using the WUA
index, a SUPPLEMENT TO THE INSTREAM FLOW STUDY (STTIFS
7/26/94) was prepared and it states in the last paragraph:
8
Therefore, more effluent water added to the natural streamflow
results in higher WUA values
In other words, the more effluent that is released to the Creek, the
better it will be for steelhead and other aquatic Creek species; the
less that is released, the worse it will be for them. This conclusion of
the final STTIFS confirms what the EQTF and many others believed
all along. The City must not err on the side of releasing too little
effluent, if it is to avoid catastrophic results to the Creek and its
native species.
With the conclusion of the final STTIFS that the more effluent
released to the Creek, the better it will be for native fish, then why is
the Utility Department still advocating an inadequate I cfs effluent
release to the Creek in the second draft EIR? Possibly they are
concluding that the Water Temperature Model section of the STTIFS
indicates higher effluent releases result in elevated Creek water
temperatures that are potentially unsatisfactory for juvenile
steelhead. At their confluence, the effluent discharge temperature is
somewhat higher than the Creek water temperature. However, the
Results and Discussion sections of the Water Temperature Model
section emphasize that by the time the combined Creek flow gets to a
bridge near the South Higuera Street Highway 101 southbound -
access, (only about one-third of the 6 mile Creek distance from the
effluent discharge to Marre Dam 1.4 miles upstream of the ocean),
even with high effluent releases to the Creek, water temperatures
have dropped to within the tolerance range for SLO Creek salmonids
(steelhead. salmon, and trout). -
Since the preceeding information indicates that there is no water
temperature argument for the Utility Department sticking with the I
cfs effluent release, then maybe they are interpreting that the
STTIFS is suggesting that the more effluent released to the Creek the
better, but I cfs is still adequate. This not only ignores the conclusion
of the STTIFS, but it also relies on the one part of the original IFS
that was seriously flawed-- the part that focused on the minimal 1
cfs effluent flow release.
There are two major flaws with the 1 cfs part of the IFS. Both stem
from the instream flow study giving the impression that the 1 cfs
effluent release will flow above ground where aquatic species as fish
could use it. In reality it will likely quickly evaporate or percolate
9
underground in the hot summer where it would be unavailable to
Creek aquatic species.
The first flaw with the 1 cfs part of the IFS, that gives the impression
there will be reliable surface flows with a 1 cfs effluent release, was
that the Creek bed and banks were inappropriately saturated with
water from much higher effluent flows immediately prior to when
the 1 cfs part of the study was done. To create the 1 cfs flow in the
Creek, the City had to divert the rest of the effluent into their
adjacent fields. These fields were small and filled so quickly that the
Creek bed and banks did not have time to dry out with the 1 cfs flow
before the rest of the effluent had to be returned to the Creek. As a
result, during the 1 cfs 'instream flow study the likely nearly
saturated bed and banks of the Creek yielded measurable above
ground flows for the entire Creek length downstream of the effluent
release point. There was no effort made to determine if with 1 cfs
effluent release there would be measurable flows in the Creek under
late summer, drier bed and bank conditions, contrasted to the actual
study conditions of very wet bed and banks.
The second flaw with the 1 cfs part of the study, compounding the
first flaw, is that the 1 cfs instream flow study was done in early July
instead of mid August, when the City plans to release the least
amount of effluent to the Creek. It is local common knowledge that as
the summer progresses (1) it tends to get hotter, (2) natural Creek
flows progressively diminish, and (3) the Creek bed and banks get
drier. For these reasons, the measurement of live-stream flows
would have been much more favorable in early July, when the study -
was
tudy -was done, than they would have been in mid August. Clearly, for the
1 cfs instream flow study results to have had a chance of reliability,
the study should have been done in mid August and not early July.
The IFS is dated Sept. 8, 1992, but it does not report when the study
was done. Instead, this information was found in a letter buried in
the back of the EIR, which stated that the study was done the week
of July 6, 1992.
The EQTF believes that if the study would have been done under the
normally nearly dry bed and bank conditions of late summer (as was
recommended to the City by an EQTF scientist), there likely would
have been little or no flow to measure for much of the Creek
downstream of the 1 cfs discharge point.
10
The Instream flow study does not mention these serious flaws with
the 1 cfs part of the IFS because to acknowledge them is to also
acknowledge that its preliminary conclusion, that 1 cfs effluent
release may be enough to maintain the Creek, is also seriously
flawed. If the procedure design of the study is wrong, then it follows
that the study results and conclusion preliminarily supporting I cfs
effluent release in the initial IFS will also be wrong.
However, the STTIFS final conclusion, that the more tertiary effluent
that is released to the Creek, the better it will be for Creek species
including steelhead, is not wrong, as it takes into account various
factors including higher effluent flow regimes. And it is a common
sense. conclusion supported by the attached Central Coast Salmon
Enhancement (CCSE) NEWSLETTER indicating for the first time in 10
years a CDFG survey found fingerling steelhead and other native fish
species (sculpin, dace, stickleback, lamprey) in much of the Creek
below the effluent discharge point. This rewarding news is
understandable since the existing 5.0 cfs effluent flows provide
adequate water quantity, and the recent improvement from
secondary to tertiary treated effluent now provide, for the first time
in many years, adequate water quality for steelhead and the other
native fish species.
So, whether the City uses the STTIFS conclusion or common sense, it
is clear that the more tertiary effluent that is released to the Creek,
the better it will be for the Creek ecosystem. Either way, it is obvious
that I cfs is not enough.
It is the EQTF's current understanding that the associated Creek flow
model, in the unfinished San Luis Obispo Creek hydrology study
report, was designed to show how much flow will be in the Creek at
various downstream points with effluent flow releases of 0, 1, 2, and
5 cfs. Because the report is unfinished, we have not yet reviewed the
Creek flow model for its results or reliability. Even so, we have a
concern that at best most of the representative downstream Creek
flows will not be actual stream flow measurements, but will have
been derived from a model. As with the 1 cfs instream flow study, if
all the right data parameters are not in the model (or wrong ones are
in it), then its results and conclusion will be wrong too.
Unfortunately, instream flow studies and stream flow hydrology
models have inherent complex problems that can cause decision
making to be very difficult. Speculation can also cause decision
11
making to be unnecessarily difficult. There are two points of
speculation presented in the draft EIR for the Water Reuse Project
and elsewhere that the EQTF will now address.
The first speculation presented by the Utility Department is that if
the state requires in the future greater effluent purity than existing
tertiary treatment releases to the Creek, it would be cheaper for the
City to divert the effluent than to further treat it. If such a future
state mandate arises, then for the short-term, diversion may be the
cheapest economic solution. But it would be at great environmental
cost to the Creek and its long-term economic tourist value to our
Community. The EQTF believes it is inappropriate for the City to
consider using effluent diversion from the Creek as a way to avoid
meeting future effluent quality standards.
The second speculation presented by the Utility Department is that
since the source of most of the effluent is outside the SLO Creek
system, then eliminating this flow to the Creek would be a return to
more normal historical Creek conditions. This is speculation because
the EIR has provided no solid evidence of what the historical flow
conditions of the Creek were. It is wishful speculation that shutting
off the effluent flows the Creek has become reliant on over past
decades would help return the Creek to its past natural grandeur.
The EQTF believes that shutting off these flows would be one more
traumatic blow to the Creek in a long history of such blows. We
should strive to turn around this long history of ecological
degradation of the Creek. Leaving most or all of this newly enhanced
tertiary effluent in the Creek is a rare opportunity to do that, as -
evidenced by the already mentioned CCSE NEWSLETTER article. To
risk undoing this superb environmental achievement by our City by
substantially reducing effluent flows in the critical summer flow
season is inviting ecological disaster.
Partly because of the inherent problems with complex scientific field
studies and speculations about past and future conditions related to
the Creek, the EQTF recommends that at this point the Council keep
an open mind. This is important because currently there are at least
the following three ideas on the appropriate effluent release to the
Creek, other than the unacceptable I cfs proposal in the EIR.
One idea is that a minimum of 3 cfs effluent should be released to 31
the Creek. This proposal was presented by. the San Luis Obispo
County Land Conservancy to the Utility Department on 5/24/94 in a
12
document dated 5/9/94 titled CITY WATER REUSE PROJECT EIR. It
has many supporters at this time including CCSE.
A second idea presently being looked at by CDFG is that a minimum
summer flow of about 3 cfs should be maintained at all times in the
Creek downstream of the discharge, regardless of the flow source.
Depending on Creek conditions (weather, month, hydrology, etc.), this
flow might be comprised of all natural flow, all effluent flow, or part
natural and part effluent flows.
A third idea recently mentioned to the EQTF by the State Water
Resource Control Board is an effluent release of about 4 cfs. This is
based on Figures 5 through 8 of the STTIFS showing that an effluent
release of about 4 cfs has the highest weighted usable area (WUA)
value for steelhead fry in all three study reaches of the Creek
downstream of the effluent discharge.
All three of these ideas. and likely others, have merit and deserve
further review. It is reasonably certain that 1 cfs effluent release is
not enough to maintain the Creek ecosystem. In this regard, the EQTF
is concerned that apparently the fish species being analysed for the
preparation of the second draft EIR only include the steelhead and
the endangered tidewater goby. The study of "indicator" species, a -
popular idea, has limited value. In the end, such studies only
indicate, at best, what environmental conditions are needed by the
indicator species studied. They do not determine the requirements of
all the other species in the environment, which were not studied.
Each species in an ecosystem has its own unique set of requirements -
for survival. Flows adequate to sustain the goby in the Creek estuary
or steelhead upstream of Marre Dam near Avila may not be adequate
to sustain the entire native fish species community in the lower San
Luis Obispo Creek ecosystem. Upstream of Marre Dam this native fish
community is comprised of, besides steelhead, three-spined
stickleback, speckled dace, Pacific lamprey, and sculpin.
It is biologically incorrect to assume that an effluent flow release
adequate to maintain steelhead and tidewater goby will also be
adequate to maintain the other native fish species. Therefore, the
EQTF recommends that the Council not certify the EIR until the
stream flow requirements for all of the named native fish species are
known for the purpose of establishing an effluent flow release
adequate to maintain them.
13
5. The EQTF urges. the City Council to consider the possibility of the
City purchasing some surrounding farmland and using its ground
water for the City. The EQTF believes this proposal has merit for
several important reasons, as supplemental City water, surrounding
open space, and valley wildlife habitat, and recommends that the
Council hold a public hearing on it within one year.
6. The EQTF's sixth and final recommendation regarding water issues
is a call for overall caution and reason. The recent drought has
caused our City to move quickly forward analysing various potential
future water supplies to meet the needs of our General Plan
population buildout of 56,000 people. Although population buildout
will not occur until about" year 2015, it is easy to indulge this water .
search now throwing caution aside. A flawed and expensive IFS has
already demonstrated this. The rest of the way we should proceed
more carefully by slowing down our water search process. The worst
that could happen in the next few years without any new sources of
water would be another extended drought and applying the same
water conservation measures that proved very successful for our
City during the recent drought.
But we are proceeding quickly ahead on complex water projects as if
we need all of our future water sooner than year 2015. This haste
can cause us to make bad decisions on the 3 big proposed domestic
water projects, Water Reuse, Salinas, and the Nacimiento Project. The
first two of these projects, as currently . proposed in their .
Environmental Impact Reports, have huge environmental costs that
cannot be adequately mitigated. -
As already discussed, the release of only I cfs effluent flow to the
Creek, proposed in the second draft EIR for the Water Reuse Project
and past drafts of the UWMP, is not enough to maintain the Creek, as
required by the City's water reclamation policy (attached).
The Salinas Reservoir Expansion Project is ecologically even worse. In
the EQTF's 3/9/94 letter to you we discussed in. it, and in our 3/6/94
attachment to it titled DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR
THE PROPOSED SALINAS RESERVOIR EXPANSION PROJECT, our
recommendations to you regarding mitigations upstream and
downstream of the dam for oak, pine, grass, marsh, and riparian
habitats. Rather than repeat those mitigation recommendations here,
we urge you to reread the 3/9/94 letter and its 'referenced
attachment.
14
However, EQTF had a major oversight in our review and comments
on the draft EIR. We failed to do a site visit before commenting. Since
then EQTF members have made site visits, and it is now obvious to us
that the approximately 77 acres of prime riparian habitat that would
be permanently destroyed by drowning by the project is
irreplaceable and therefore unmitigable. It is dispersed along about 1
and 1/2 miles of the upper Salinas River and about 1/2 mile of
Alamo Creek. Along the Salinas River this belt of mature riparian
habitat averages about 100 yards wide its entire length of proposed
inundation. Unfortunately, the construction of over 150 large
reservoirs throughout the state has resulted in the loss of almost all
of the State's once common mountain valley, riparian riverine
ecosystems. This is one of the few remaining, and all of it recently
has been designated by the County, along with its trails, as a passive
public park, with its natural wonders little known to the public as
yet!
It is nearly unthinkable to the EQTF that our environmentally
sensitive City could be permanently stigmatized by being one of the
last cities in California to destroy a mountain valley and its lush
riparian river ecosystem. We know of no other active major dam
project proposal in California-- whether a new one or an expansion of
an old one, the latter having the same devastating ecological effects
as the former. Such projects are wisely not being built anymore, not
even by the two great dam builders of the past, the Bureau of
Reclamation and the Corps of Engineers. Because site visits were such
environmental eye-openers on this project for EQTF members, -
especially to the newly opened and little known passive public park
along the beautiful upper Salinas River riparian zone, we recommend
that the entire Council do the same.
The third project, Nacimiento, is also of such great environmental
magnitude that once its project features have been delineated in the
EIR, a public City Council site visit is appropriate for it too. However,
we do know at this time that Nacimiento is very different from
Salinas. It does not require the enlargement of the existing reservoir
(which, if it did, could be even more ecologically damaging than
Salinas, as among other things it would flood the upstream majestic
Narrows canyon and further deplete -the downstream Salinas River
riparian zone). We are only asking for our rights,to. water of the
existing reservoir. For this reason it will likely be, less of an. ecological
problem than Salinas. The project will require water distribution
15
pipelines from the reservoir to local cities, but the pipelines will be
buried and habitat vegetation can be established over the lines. On
the other hand, .the draft EIR process on this project is just starting,
so we can only speculate as to the ultimate environmental impacts of
this project, as compared to the other two major projects.
And that is the point the EQTF wants to make. Only after all '3
Environmental Impact Reports are completed, can our City compare
their positives and negatives and make an informed decision. The
Environmental Impact Reports for Water Reuse and Salinas will soon
be done, but there is no rule or logic requiring acting on either one of
these Environmental Impact Reports until the Nacimiento draft EIR is
done in a year or so. The argument that CEQA requires that each
project be adequately mitigated on its own, and therefore can
proceed on its own, is a legal argument that has nothing to do with
environmental reality. That reality, as earlier stated in this letter, is
that these types of water projects are so big and ecologically
damaging that they are impossible to adequately mitigate, except
perhaps for superficially satisfying CEQA's legal requirements on
paper. But legal requirements do not ensure the survival of native
species, as proven by more and more species continually being added
to endangered species lists. So if .we must choose between
ecologically devastating projects, then we must wait until all the -
environmental impacts for each project have been analysed in each
EIR. Then we can compare them and choose the one that is the least
ecologically devastating.
With this in mind, the EQTF recommends that the Council finish the -
Environmental Impact Reports for Water Reuse and Salinas and hold
them in abeyance with no further action until the Nacimiento draft
EIR is finished. The Council and public can then review the three
projects together to determine which, if any, will meet our City's
water needs with the least environmental damage. And as a part of
this review, considering the unusual environmental magnitude of
each of these three projects, we also recommend that the Council
make public site visits to each.
Sincerely, EQTF
C
7024
R=SOLUTION NO. (1991 Series)
=STA:LISzING POLICY REGARDING
T' USE C: RECLAIMED WATER
1i-ERE=.S, City pClicy is to p'.rsue 'z water reClcmat_Cn
program to 5::_J.lement the City l s water supply, and
W-HERE.AS, By Cffsctting the currant ncn-potable water use
with reclainned water, the City would be able t0 avoid de-manC's on
t.^.e safe yield from its other water so-:=c65, and
k =.S, using reclaiz.e d water to replace Cr au gma:,t t at
used frcm rivate Dells for irrigation and/Cr Ct.^.er ncn-;Cta `le
use wc,-,Id allow for a to"oar ratE of wit.-.dra- al from tl:e .*-asi.l an-4
more hater available _Cr DGtable use .
N04, _r.--_r0=_7, BEE IT RESOLVED-, rV the City Council of t:^.e
City of -can L_is 0b1sc0 that City pclicy regarding reclaimed
water use places e.:,,hasis on C__f setting LGtable water dc'_nd for
ncn-potable use and :zinir.izing the amount of Groundwater DL'-=ed
for ncn-potable use.
R_ IT RESOT-VED, in keeling with State water recla-align
policy, each reclai-med water project should be a cost effective
:roject when cC'D&red to developing a raw potable water source.
=E IT FUR_- ER RESOLVED, that the following is the City
zolicz Guideline for a proving of reclaimed water projects . If
ce=and for category I is net; then reclaimed water could be
distributed to category II.
CATECC•RY _T _
• EX:S�:? G _ .R=G=._:C`�'� O?:-?0=:?iC n:.:3R u5==5 i:_= CC:3:=C:SGV CO C�:Y
• EX.ST=?:G iRR:G:.=:C1'�NON-?O=:.S:-
1675= _HAT IS S:__-T-N _r.- UABAWN
LS:R LTNE (URL) , W_�j OR W__ O1UT A CONN'cCT'sON TO 7,_ C11Y ,„-_R
SY STS:S W=:Cj S"?:CY A ?R=VA=S WELL TO SUPPLY OR AUGX-7NT C:==R NCN-
• ] =_i:' :1=KG C._=f-:0+i. .CR SXISTmZ?:G TNS:'Sr?: US=S ?_1O I?;CAT CT1T;�L
GROv?:O'r;n:SR R=C TARGE.
CiTEGORY II
• NEW 1=;=GA..cti/Nc:.-?o:A=__ USERs
1
• ;r., U- nR_GA:=G?:�?:C.':-?C'..n_a �Scr.S _=s� Y_= -N OR
c :;ANC= AGR�C:s. OR G=.:i SiAC2.
;t> I co•
Central C10ast
Salmon Enhancement
n4�nb5gccML.
Vol. 7, No. 2 NEWSLETTER April^lay 1994
SLO Creek Steelhead - Confirmed!
The first survey in nearly along Hj2hway 101 near Avila ing has occured. This is good
ten years has confirmed that Beach. news after so manv years with
Steelhead trout continue to in- A brief Department of little rainfall. Along with the
habit all areas of San Luis Fish and Game survey in this trout were other native species
Obispo Creek. We have known area found trout in three of including sculpin, dace, stickle-
that they exist in areas of four locations sampled! The back, lamprey, crayfish, and
downtown and the upper wa- fish were young of the year, or pond turtle. Non-native species
tershed, but %ve were not sure if approximately 1-inch long, included goldfish, carp, catfish,
they lived in the lower creek, and prove that natural spawn- sunfish, and mesquitofish.
Legislation Update Salmon Trout Education Program
Assembly Bill 2557, the
Central Coast Ocean Resources
Enhancement Program, has Y� ' ;,r; 4r
been tabled for this year. CCSE h
was instrumental in crafting this
legislation which was designed
to support programs that en- -. 3
hance ocean fisheries. The legis-
lation will be improved and -
hopefully introduced again next
year.
70,000 Fish to Arrive
On Saturday, June 25th, J !
CCSE will tentatively transfer
fish from a Fish and Game Educator Troy Horton stocks his classroom incubator aquarium
hatchery truck to our ocean rear- with trout eggs provided by CCSE for "hands on' learning.
ing pens at Port San Luis Har-
bor. We anticipate a late after- to extend a special thank you to would like to come watch or
noon delivery of these native the Commercial Salmon Stamp help out with the transfer, con-
California, Feather River Chi- Committee for their support in tact CCSE closer to the 18th for
nook salmon. CCSE would like obtaining these fish. If you the exact time of arrival.
New Office and Phone Number
CCSE has relocated its office to 1321 Price Street in Pismo Beach (no change in mailing address),
next to Scrambles restaurant. We are looking for volunteers to stop by and help out with a variety of pro-
jects -no skills are necessary. We also have a number of fish related publications available for browsing at
your leisure. Although we don't have regular office hours, there is often someone around in the mornings
and appointments are welcome by calling (805) 773-6769 or sending a fax to(805) 773-6942.
oard of Directors and Staff
President-Rick Ivpe Secretary-Dusty Dunstan Director-Bob Grosenbacb . H.Director- Jay Elder
Vice Pres -Dick Neuberger Treasury-Al McVay Director -Stan.Radom H.Director-John Benson
Address _Staff Biologist
P.O.Box 277 Avila Beach,CA 93424 (805)773-6769 Project Mgr -Paul Cleveland
MEETINq 4 AGENDA
DATE " ,.ITEM #
SL® CC
BUILDERS SAN WIS OBISPO OFFICE• 3563-G Sueldo• P.O. Box 1222•San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
EAC FLAN�E (805)543.1330• FAX(805)543.7016
RUMVED ABISCAOERO OFFICE•5407 EI Camino Real •Amscadeio, CA 93422
FM (805)4660670• FAX(805)466-5029
NOV1 51"4
CITY CLERK
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA C O Coo DIR
FIN DMI
Honorable Peg Pinard ACAO O FIRE CHIEF
Mayor 1EY O PWNR
City of San Luis Obispo F11
IMO O POLICE CHF
P.O. Box 8100 O AM DIR
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 - '8100 D LE DI�-
Dear Ms. Pinard: p PERS111111t
On behalf of the San Luis Obispo County Builders
Exchange, representing 600 contractors, suppliers and
allied professionals in the construction industry in San
Luis Obispo County, I wish to go on record as opposed to
the proposal being debated tonight to increase the water
connection rates by nearly 300 percent and have these
connection fees paid for "up front. "
Yesterday afternoon I was one of a half dozen members of
the development and construction industry who met with
Mr. William Statler, Finance Director, to discuss how this
decision had been reached. I compliment him on a thorough
analysis and some very difficult number-crunching.
Assumptions have been made, and had to be made, to come up
with this proposal. Unfortunately, as I told to him, I
believe the final proposal is unworkable. With these
fees we are simply pricing out low and moderate-cost
housing. This has tremendous social implications. In
addition, we are committing to the development of water
facilities that, according to at least one large segment
of the our community, may not even be necessary to meet
our future water needs if water conservation measures
adopted during the drought could continue.
I would respectfully ask the City Council to postpone a
decision on this matter. . I appreciate all the hours
of work that have gone into this, and I know we all want
to get on with the matter. However, I must point out that
the persons on whose backs the financing of future water
facilities falls, namely, the developers who met with Mr.
Statler yesterday afternoon, have grave reservations about
the financial feasibility of this plan. If the city
commits to this, and no growth occurs, we will be building
water facilities at great expense to- existing residents --
and these will be facilities we could.,have lived without!
This is not fair to existing residents. If the city wants
development to pay its own way, a plan must be adopted
that allows this. The present plan does nothing but
Honorable Peg Pinard
November 15, 1994
Page Two
discourage the type of development the city wants to
encourage, namely moderately priced housing, while
simultaneously committing the city to expensive water
facility developments that will be unnecessary for another
thirty years if no growth occurs. The'.developers
yesterday were very vocal in saying development could not
occur profitably under this plan. And if it is not
profitable to build, no building will occur.
To support this.. proposal tonight is to mortgage our future
unnecessarily. I would respectfully. request that this
decision be postponed until those of us who met with Mr.
Statler, and other concerned members of our community, can
meet to come up with other alternatives. I would be most
willing to discuss this further with you. It is far
better to make no decision tonight than to make a bad
decision.
Sincerely,
LESLIE RAMSEY
Executive Director
. .cc: Members of the City Council
Business. MEETING AGENDA
TE As"I44
4 ITEM #
Betcha can't guess e
city with lowest fees
SANLUIS OBISPO — Quint —
which city in the county has far and
away the lowest fees for new con
struction?
If any of you guessed San Luis David
Obispo,1'd be amazed.You deserve
An extra-large bowl of rocky road ice Eddy
,cream,which,apropos of nothing,hit (^
.We market 65 years ago this week-
Real estate developers often com- Most of the alien have no such
-plain about how the city.burcaucracy charge.
in San Luis Obispo makes it so Despite San Luis.Obispo's ranking,
difficult to build. Willhoit, being a developer, couldn't
So I was shocked when 1 came resist a parting shot at the city,
across a survey of fees in the latest "If you can't build,it doesn't make
newsletter published by The Building any difference."
Industry Association of the Central ff }
Coast One other item in the BIACO
'The city of San Luis Obispo doesn't newsletter raised my eyebrows: an
Just have the lowest building fees for endorsement of Democrat Jack
commercial projects,they're less than O'Connell for slate Senate.
half the second lowest,Paso Robles, The reason I was surprised is that I
'and less than one-sixth of the coun- would have expected BIACO to back
ty's• Republican Steve MacElvaine.Nearly
BIACO also surveyed Sanla•Barba- all the rest of the BIACO recommen-
ra County, and San Luis Obispo's dations are Republicans. (No Mike
were lower than anything there, Huflington endorsement, though, as
including the city of Santa Maria.' BIACO has no recommendation for
Here's how they stack up in San U.S.Senate.)
Luis Obispo County for 50,000-square- Willhoit said MacElvainc embodies
'fool commercial shell,with BIACO's a lot of BIACO's philosophies, but
caveat that not all fees may be O'Connell is special.
.included. "Jack O'Connell has probably been
San Luis Obispo—$27,299. the one legislator, regardless of the
Paso Robles—$69,406. side of the aisle,who has really gone ,
Grover Beach—$71,206. to bat for the building industry"
Atascadcro—$147,078. O'Connell has been particularly
Pismo Beach—$152,800. helpful on school tees for new con-
Arroyo Grande—$208,012.
on•ArroyoGrande—$208,012. struction.In fact,he was named the.
SLO County—$217278. 1992 Legislator of the Year by BIA
Note:BIACO states that the city of CO's statewide association.
Morro Bay did not respond to re- All this makes Ogonnell's impres-
questsfor information. sive showing in the Telegram.
BIACO President Dick Willhoit, Tribune's poll Friday — 46 percent
who heads Estrella Associates' in among San Luis Obispo County vot-
'Paso Robles, said he wasn't that ers to 28 percent for MacElvaine —
surprised by San Luis Obispo's show. easier for me to understand.
Ing because while the city has lradi• o tr a
tionally been slow growth, it does Moving away from politics—thank-
actively seek sales taxes,which would fully, far, far away — 1 got a press
help explain the low commercial fees. release this week from a South
But San Luis Obispo also has low Carolina-based outfit .called the
residential fees, just slightly higher Sports Performance Corp.
than one other, city, Atascadcro. The company, which markets golf
Here's what they charge for a 1,500- equipment and instructional videos by.
squaro-foot home• people like swing.guru David Lead-
, Atascadero—57,057. ' better and soon-to-be-named PGA
.San Luis Obispo—27,129. Player of the Year Nick Price, has
''Arroyo Grande—$9,915. opened a new 'Telesales" office in
Paso Robles—$10,702. San Luis Obispo. By the way, the
Grover Beach—Siiji:z company is hiring, and the local
Pismo Beach—$11,795. phone number is 782.9550.
SLO County—$15297. But the beauty of the announce-
Ism ®, 1 was surprised to see lite county ment particularly for those of you
COUNCIL CDD DIR charging s0 much more,but Willhoit missing Herb Caen's namephreaks
said there are a couple of reasons for while the San Francisco Chronicle
CAO FIN DIR this. employees are on strike—is that the
ACAO' One is that the county is on.the 'name of the company's president is p�
❑ FIRE CHIEF leading edge in charging succi fees, Swing Meyer. /� C 0 4 j t D
ATTORNEY ❑ PW bIR such as the $16,350 charge to build And the San Luis Obispo operation 1t/
lire stations and the like.None of the is being run by none other than Kurt
11CLERKIORIG 'Cl POLICE CHF cities charges a public fatalities fcc- Ball. '
❑ MGMT.TEAM ❑ REC DiR Yet NOV In 1994
'Also, the fees are different in the ,a f
7 C , CD FILE X UTfL DIR various unincorporated areas. The My aciddress at the Telegram.
�y rrG ❑ PERS DIR survey used Templeton as a point of Tribune, Is P.O. Box 112, San(Luis CITY CLERK
3 .i reference. In Templetonthere's a, Obispo 93406.Phone:781.7908.Fax: SAN LUIS O6I$PO,CA
special[cc of about$3,000 for traffic- 781.7905.
MEETING AGENDA
ITEM#�
San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce
1039 Chorro Street • San Luis Obispo, California 93401-3278
(805) 781.2777 • FAX (805) 543-1255
David E. Garth, Executive Director RECEIVED
NOV 1 5 19944
November 15, 1994 CITY CLERK
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA
Honorable Mayor and City Council Iq COUNCIL O CDD DIR
City of San Luis Obispo 1% CAO. 0 FIN DIN
990 Palm StreetAGAO O FIRE CHIEF
�(
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 ATTORNEY O PW DIR
CLERKIORIO O POLICE CHF
O IlfildT TEAM O REC DIR
13 C READ FILE >(UTIL DIR
RE: Urban Water Management Plan VILC 0 PEggplq
Dear Mayor and City Council Members:
The San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce urges your support of the Urban Water
Management Plan. This policy document is well written and provides the long-range
planning for our community's water needs. Further, this document serves to
accomplish the goals established in the recently adopted Land Use Element.
Regarding the water use rate in policy 2.3.2, the Chamber recommends maintaining at
least the 145 gallons per person per day figure (as currently cited in the document), and
stresses that any number less than this would seriously jeopardize the ability to meet
future water demand.
The Chamber of Commerce encourages the Council to consider reduced fee
status for long term, dedicated low and very low income housing projects.
Since the issue of low income housing is a community problem, the
responsibility for lost revenue should be carried by the community at large
through the General Fund, as opposed to penalizing only new development.
ACCREDITED
CMaYBER OR CO•IEMCE
C...SEP 01 CO.W ME
O. I"t UNI TEO STA TT5
In summary, the Chamber recommends that you adopt the Urban Water
Management Plan and move forward in your efforts to secure a reliable and long-
term water supply for our community's future.
Sincerely,
Wanda Strassburg, Preside
San Luis Obispo Chamber of..Commerce
Pierre Rademaker, Chair
Water Task Force
San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce
MEER AGENDA
S LO COUNTY DATE - 15-q ITEM#
BUILDERSSAN W IS OBISPO OFFICE • 3563-G Sueldo • P.O. Box 1222•San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
EXCHAH G E (805)543-7330• FAX(805)543-7016
ATASCADERO OFFICE • 5407 EI Camino Real• Atascadem, CA 93422
(805)466-0870 • FAX(805)466.5029
November 8, 1994
Mr. William C. Statler RECEIVED
Director of Finance
City of San Luis Obispo
P.O. Box 8100 NOV - 9 1994
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100
CITY CLERK
Dear Mr. Statler: SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA
Thank you for sending us the Notice Regarding Proposed Increase in Water
Impact Fees for the City of San Luis Obispo.
The San Luis Obispo County Builders Exchange (SLOCBE) wishes to go on record
opposing the proposed increase, for many of the same reasons we opposed the
recent increase in the 1994 Uniform Building Code fees and the amendment of
park in-lieu fees. We are experiencing a very weak recovery in the
construction industry locally. We believe raising the water impact fees
nearly 300 per cent will constitute yet another setback for us.
At this time it is far less expensive to purchase an existing home than to
build a new one. The real estate market remains very slow. A number of
factors have contributed to this stagnation: unemployment, out-of-state
flight, rising interest rates, increased materials and labor costa. There is
little (if anything) the City of San Luis Obispo can do about these.
In light of this situation, it would be a tremendous help to everyone if the
city would postpone any fee increases for now.
We would be receptive to discussing alternatives that would help keep
building costs down while ensuring quality construction and compliance with
all existing government regulations. Only by working together will we reach
our mutual goals of a healthy economy and a healthful environment.
Sincerely,
LESLIE RAMSEY COUNCIL CVG DIR `
Executive Director VCAO VFIN DIR h `
VACAO ❑ FIRE CHIEF I
;/$TTORNEY ❑,PUS;DIRK
CLERK(ORIG ❑ POLICE CHi:�"
❑ MGMTTEAM ❑ EC DIA
❑`C READ FILE 11iff UTiL DIR
❑ PERS DI,Ri
IfiOM.IIeiT..��T. a i,•