Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/12/2002, SS 4 - WATER DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES C - M7 ,Dam council ,?-/z—a I [A] acEnbA Report CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FROM: Bill Statler, Director of Finance td/ SUBJECT: WATER DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES CAO RECOMMENDATION 1. Review the Water Development Impact Fees report prepared by the Department of Finance setting forth recommended fees based on updated water supply costs along with the treatment and distribution system fee recommendations prepared by David Taussig and Associates. 2. Direct staff to set a public hearing for adoption of these fees at the April 16, 2002 Council meeting. DISCUSSION Background The underlying analysis for all three components of the City's current water development impact fees—supply, treatment and distribution—was last performed in November 1994. Since that time, the fees have been adjusted by changes in the consumer price index in accordance with the City's fee policy. In updating the underlying project cost assumptions, we used two parallel but coordinated approaches: 1. Water Treatment and Distribution. In conjunction with the Airport Area and Margarita Area Specific Plans, we prepared a comprehensive, community-wide Water Master Plan for water treatment and distribution system improvements. As part of this planning effort, David Taussig and Associates (DTA) prepared an analysis of water impact fees reflecting new development's share of these costs. The results of both the master plan and impact fee analysis for treatment and distribution system improvements are addressed in a separate, companion report preceding this one. 2. Water Supply. City staff took the lead in preparing the supply component of the water development impact fee. The results of this analysis are provided in the attached report. Additionally, this report integrates the treatment and distribution fees prepared by DTA with the supply fees prepared by City staff into one combined fee. Key Findings and.Assumptions In implementing the City's General Plan policy that new development should pay its fair share of the cost of facilities needed to serve it, the update recommends significant increases in water development impact fees: for single family residential uses, from $7,905 to $11,265 per unit. Council Agenda Report: Water Development Impact Fees Page 2 This is largely driven by the supply component of the fee, which are further detailed in the attached report. The following summaries key findings and assumptions: Main Driver for Water Supply Cost Increases In preparing the 1994 analysis, City staff developed three project cost (and related impact fee) ranges: low, medium and high. In 2002 dollars, the revised fee is right in the mid-range of these original estimates, which was the initial recommendation. However, the Council at that time decided to set the fee at the "low range" due to the size of the increase and uncertainties regarding these projects and estimated costs. As such, while the revised fees are in line with our prior analysis, there is a large adjustment at this time because as costs have become more fully developed and refined over time, they have trended towards the higher range—not the lower one. Methodology and%y Assumptions The 2002 update uses the same basic methodology as the 1994 analysis, including the following key assumptions: 1. Current population of 44,613 and build-out population of 56,000. 2. 1% annual growth rate. 3. New development must pay its fair share of the cost of facilities needed to serve it. 4. Water demand based on 145 gallons per day per capita. (Note: As described in the Water- Wastewater Element of the General Plan, this encompasses both residential and non- residential uses.) 5. Current safeannualyield of 7,735 acre-feet(without adjusting for siltation). 6. Reliability reserve of 2,000 acre-feet annually and siltation allowance of 500 acre-feet at build-out. Water Supply Projects Also Benefit Existing Users As noted above, the purpose of the proposed revision in water development impact fees is to implement the City's policy that new development should pay its fair share of the cost of building the facilities necessary to serve it. On the other hand, water system improvements that are intended to benefit existing development must be funded through general-purpose rates. As discussed more fully in the attached report, most of the City's future water supply project costs will not be incurred for new development, but for current users. Why? Because the single largest component of our future water supply costs is to develop the 2,000 acre-feet reserve, which benefits both existing users and new development. Prorating this cost between our current population (44,000) and the one projected at build-out (56,000) means that about 80% of the cost of developing this reserve (1,593 acre feet) needs to be funded by 7-2 1 � Council Agenda Report: Water Development Impact Fees Page 3 existing users, not new development. (Note: New development will be responsible for paying for its share of the reserve). Combined with its share of the cost of offsetting lost "safe annual yield" due to reservoir siltation, this means that existing users (via general-purpose rates) are responsible for 52% of the planned water supply project costs. The report analyzes in detail what this means in terms of general-purpose rate increases for existing ratepayers. The conclusion is that sometime after 2005 (and it could be much later than this depending on when another source of supply project comes on-line after Water Reuse), a general-purpose rate increase of 21.5% will be needed to fund existing development's share of new supply capital costs. This is also consistent with the 1994 report, which projected general-purpose rate increases of 8% to 18%. Moreover, these projections did not assume a 10% rate reduction, which the Council approved in July 1999. Adjusting for this, the update is at the low-end of the previously projected rate requirements. Mitigating the Impact The report identifies ways of mitigating this impact on existing ratepayers, including: Phasing-in the increase. As noted above, this rate increase will not be needed until 2005 at the soonest—and may not be needed until long after then. This means we have significant flexibility in phasing-in this increase. Under our most recent rate review (May 2001), no rate increases are planned for 2001-02 or 2002-03; and very modest rate increases of 3% annually are planned for 2003-04 and 2004-05. Because this added rate increase may not be required until significantly after 2005, there is time to phase-in this cost rather than asking our ratepayers to absorb it all at one time. Revisit some of the underlying assumptions. As discussed more fully in the report, the cost of new supplies—and the related share allocated to new development—is driven by two factors: 1. The per capita demand ratio of 145 gallons per day, which is about 15% higher than our average (and relatively consistent)per capita usage of 125 over the last seven years. 2. The 2,000 acre-foot reserve, of which about 80% of the cost is attributable to existing development. The annual cost of this reserve—which will be incurred each and every year whether we need it or not—is about $3.1 million. Of this, about $2.5 million every year is the responsibility of our current ratepayers. Given the significant cost impacts of our current planning assumptions for per capita usage and reliability reserve on both existing and future users, this is an issue the Council may want to address when it next reviews the Annual Water Resources Status Report scheduled for June 2002. 14-3 Council Agenda Report: Water Development Impact Fees Page 4 FISCAL IMPACT There are no direct fiscal impacts associated with adopting the proposed impact fees. In fact, their purpose is to avoid adverse fiscal impacts on our ratepayers by ensuring that new development pays its fair share of the water system improvements needed to serve it. ALTERNATIVES I. Defer adoption of the water supply portion of the updated fees. Deferring adoption of the revised fees only makes sense if we thought that new information would be forthcoming in the near term that might significantly alter the results. However, the attached report is based on the latest and best information that is available to us now and into the foreseeable future. The only change that might occur in the near term is if the Council approved revisions in key underlying policy components of the analysis, such as the per capita demand ratio, the amount of the reliability reserve or not requiring new development to pay its fair share of its facility costs. If the Council believes that policy changes in any of these areas might be possible within the next several months, then deferral of the water supply portion of the increase might make sense. In this case, we recommend that the Council go forward with the proposed increases for treatment and distribution system improvements. On the other hand, if the Council believes that policy changes might be seriously considered, but that this will take longer than a few months (a more likely outcome given our commitment to meaningful public participation and the significant community interest that this is likely to generate), then we recommend adopting the full update now, and simply revising the fees if and when the underlying policies are revised. 2. Adopt lower fees. The facility costs allocated to new development are based on the best information available to us now and into the foreseeable future. Therefore, absent any underlying policy changes as discussed above, setting the fees at a lower amount would be contrary to our adopted General Plan and Financial Plan policies. Further, based on our past experience, adopting lower fees based on less-than-likely assumptions simply defers hard decision-making to the future, when the cumulative impact of deferral may make these decisions even tougher. For these reasons, we do not recommend this option. 3. Do not adopt any revisions to current fees. Again, this would be contrary to our adopted policies, and as such, we do not recommend this option. ATTACHMENT Report on water development impact fees G:Water and Sewer Impact Fees/Council Agenda Report i WATER DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES March 12, 2002 Prepared by the Department of Finance city of sAn Luis OBISPO � -S V � city of san Luis oBlspo Water Development Impact Fees TABLE OF CONTENTS Overview Purpose I Scope: Types of Improvements and Area 1 Reliance on Existing Policies I Proposed Water Development Impact Fees Water Supply I Water Treatment and Distribution 2 Combined Fee 2 Affect of Water Supply Projects on Existing Users Water Supply Projects Also Benefit Existing Users 2 Impact on General-Purpose Rates 3 Mitigating the Impact 3 Affect of Affordable Housing Policies 4 Water Supply Summary of the Financing Methodology 5 Key Assumptions 5 Step 1: New Water Supply Requirements 6 Step 2: Water Supply Solutions 7 Step 3: Cost of New Water Supplies 7 Step 4: Allocation of Costs Between Existing Users and New Development 8 Step 5: Funding Strategies 8 Step 6: Recommended Water Development Impact Fees 10 Comparison of Proposed Fees with Other Agencies 11 Affect of Proposed Fees on Sample Non-Residential Projects 12 —lD iiiii��l!!IIIIIIII luiiii�l city of san Luis OBISp0 Water Development Impact Fees March 12, 2002 OVERVIEW Purpose This report sets forth an approach for funding water system improvements that is consistent with the City's policy that new development should 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. Scope: Types of Improvements and Area The proposed fees cover three types of water system improvements: supply, treatment and distribution. While this report includes the combined fee for all three of these components, it focuses on water supply and relies upon a separate analysis prepared in conjunction with the Water Master Plan for treatment and distribution costs. Additionally, the proposed fee only addresses improvements that meet new development's share of system-wide requirements. In most cases, new development will also be required to directly make system improvements as a condition of development, such as "in tract" water lines. Moreover, there may be supplemental fees in special planning areas—such as the Airport Area and Margarita Area—to fund water system improvements that are unique to these areas. In these cases, both the system-wide and area-specific fees will apply. Reliance on Existing Policies The City's existing General Plan policies as set forth in the Land Use and Water-Wastewater Elements, combined with our most recent demographic and project cost data, are the basis for the proposed fees. Proposed Water Development Impact Fees Water Supply. As discussed in greater detail below, the proposed fee for water supply projects for single-family residential (SFR) uses is $10,112 per unit. This is within the range estimated in 1994 when the supply fees were first developed: in 2002 dollars, the estimated costs at that time per SFR unit ranged from a low of$6,255 to a high of$14,994. The revised fee is right in the mid-range of these original estimates, which was the staff's original recommendation. However, the Council at that time decided to set the fee at the "low range" ($6,255) due to the size of the increase and uncertainties regarding these projects and estimated costs. As such, 4- / J. i Water Development Impact Fees Page 2 while the revised fees are in line with our prior analysis, there is a large adjustment at this time because as costs have become more fully developed and refined over time, they have trended towards the higher range—not the lower one. For example: 1. The 1994 analysis assumed 1,550 acre feet in net safe annual yield from the Salinas Reservoir expansion project at per acre-foot costs (in 2002 dollars) ranging from $492 to $604. For reasons described below, this project is not included in the cost calculations in this update: after water reuse, all new water supplies are assumed to come from the Nacimiento pipeline project. 2. The Nacimiento pipeline project was estimated to cost between $623 and $1,193 per acre- foot in the 1994 report. Moreover, at the "low cost" range selected by the Council, only 1,311 acre-feet of the higher-cost Nacimiento project was used in the 1994 report in meeting the 3,861 acre-foot new supply goal, with the balance coming from the lower-cost Salinas Reservoir expansion (1,550 acre-feet) and water reuse projects (1,000 acre-feet). In the 2002 update, the amount of new supply from the higher-cost Nacimiento project is estimated at 2,848 acre-feet and the per acre-foot cost estimate is $1550. In short, compared with the "low range" costs used in the 1994 report, this updates assumes more of the higher- cost source is used (2,848 acre-feet compared with 1,311); and at a higher per acre-foot cost ($1,550 compared with $623). It should be noted that the 2002 costs for water reuse and conservation are in-line with the 1994 estimates, and this moderates the impact of the increased cost assumptions for these other supply options. Water Treatment and Distribution. The proposed fee for water treatment and distribution improvements per SFR unit is $1,144. This reflects new development's fair share of the costs for system-wide improvements identified in the Water Master Plan ($340 per SFR unit). Currently, the comparable fee for these types of improvements is $804. Combined Fee. The proposed combined fee for new development's fair share of planned water supply, treatment and distribution system improvements is $11,256 per SFR unit compared with the current combined fee of$7,059. As noted above, this large increase is primarily driven by updated costs for water supply projects. Affect of Water Supply Projects on Existing Users Water Supply Projects Also Benefit Existing Users. As noted above, the purpose of the proposed revision in water development impact fees is to implement the City's policy that new development should pay its fair share of the cost of building the facilities necessary to serve it. On the other hand, water system improvements that are intended to benefit existing development must be funded through general-purpose rates. As discussed more fully below, most of the City's future water supply will not be incurred for new development,but for current users. J Water Development Impact Fees Page 3 Why? Because the single largest component of our future water supply costs is to develop the 2,000 acre-feet reserve, which benefits both existing users and new development. Prorating this cost between our current population (44,000) and the one projected at build-out (56,000) means that about 80% of the cost of developing this reserve (1;593 acre feet) needs to be funded by existing users, not new development. (Note: New development will be responsible for paying for its share of the reserve). Combined with its share of the cost of offsetting lost "safe annual yield" due to reservoir siltation, this means that existing users (via general-purpose rates) are responsible for 52% of the planned water supply project costs (Table 1.3 on page 6). Impact on General-Purpose Rates. On an annualized basis, existing development's share of new water supply costs is $2.9 million (Table 4 on page 8). A large part of this cost has already been factored into our current rates. However, after adjusting for this, there remains $1.9 million in water supply costs attributable to existing development that is outside of the most recent rate analysis, which was presented to the Council on May 29, 2001. Given our projected rate base in 2004-05 of$8.6 million, this translates into a 21.5%rate increase.. However, this also compares favorably with our analysis in 1994, which projected general- purpose rate increases of 8% to 18%. Moreover, these projections did not assume a 10% rate reduction, which the Council approved in July 1999. Adjusting for this, the update is at the low- end of the previously projected rate requirements. Mitigating the Impact. Because of our prior multi-year rate setting strategy, there is the opportunity to phase-in this increase over time. Under our most recent rate review, no rate increases are planned for 2001-02 or 2002-03; and very modest rate increases of 3% annually are planned for 2003-04 and 2004-05. It is unlikely that supply costs beyond those already planned through 2004-05 will occur before 2005. Because of this, this rate increase may not be required until significantly after 2005: it depends on when new source of supply projects beyond the water reuse project (and related costs) come on-line. As such, there is time to phase-in this cost rather than asking our ratepayers to absorb it all at one time. Additionally, as noted above, existing development's share of the planned 2,000 acre-foot reserve (1,593 acre feet) is a large part of the needed rate increase. For example, if the reserve were set at 1,000 acre-feet instead (11% of projected demand rather than 22%), then annual costs attributable to new supply for existing development would decrease by about $1.2 million. This would result in a much more modest 8% rate adjustment (rather than 21.5%), which could also be spread over several years. However, this incremental cost should be placed in perspective: as shown in Table 5.4 (page 9), the monthly increase to the existing "average" SFR ratepayer to fully cover both the reliability reserve (at 2,000 acre-feet) and siltation costs is $5.74. As an example, if the reserve is reduced to 1,000 acre-feet, this declines to about $2.00. In short, our ratepayers may consider the added monthly cost of about $3.75 a"value-added" feature given the added security it may provide. On the other hand, our safe annual yield is already based on the worst drought on record; and projected demand—at 145 gallons per day per capita (including non-residential users}--is also �- 9 J Water Development Impact Fees Page 4 based on very conservative assumptions, since our actual usage over the past several years has been far below this level. For example, comparable per capita use in 2001 compared with the 145 planning target was 118 (about 20% lower); and in the prior three Water Usage:Gallons Per Day Per Capita years it was 123, 129 and 124 (15% Includes Non-Residential Users lower). 185 - -- - -----_ _ . ..-- While we are unlikely to sustain our 'ss lowest usage of 86 during the height las- --- of the drought in 1991, the fact is 'Zs that average usage over the last i 85 seven years has ranged between 1.18 as to 133, with an average, post- ss drought usage during this same W W W N period of 125—about 15% lower than our planning assumption—with our most recent usage trends showing continued decrease. In summary on this point, given the significant cost impacts of our current conservative planning assumptions for per capita usage and reliability reserve on both existing and future users, this is an issue the Council may want to address when it next reviews the Annual Water Resources Status Report scheduled for June 2002. Note: While the City's Charter clearly states that any new water supplies developed for the reliability reserve are to be used solely for this purpose and are not available to support new development, the amount of the reserve is set by the Council. Affect of Affordable Housing Policies. Under the City's affordable housing incentive policies, low and moderate income housing units developed by non-profit organizations (such as the Housing Authority or People's Self-Help Housing) are exempt from system-wide development impact fees. Additionally, affordable dwelling units built by the private sector in excess of required inclusionary housing requirements are also exempt from system-wide development impact fees. No adjustments have been made for this in the impact fee calculations. As such, to the extent that this occurs, impact fee revenues will be less than projected, and general-purpose rates will have to be raised to offset any resulting losses. However, this is consistent with the General Plan policies regarding new development paying its own way: LU 1.14: Costs of Growth. The costs of public facilities and services needed for new development shall be borne by the new development, unless the community chooses to help pay the costs for a certain development to obtain community-wide benefits. In this case, the Council has determined that providing affordable housing incentives is one of these"community-wide"benefit situations. y�� 1 Water Development Impact Fees Page 5 WATER SUPPLY Summary of the Financing Methodology There are six basic steps in developing recommended water impact fees for supply projects: 1. Determine water supply requirements and allocate them between existing users and new development based on: a. Projected water demand at General Plan build-out. b. Reserve requirements. c. Loss of supply capacity in reservoirs due to siltation. 2. Identify water supply solutions that will meet the City's needs through build-out. 3. Determine the costs of developing these additional water supplies on an annual basis. 4. Allocate these costs between existing users and new development. 5. Develop appropriate funding strategies in financing new water supply projects: a. Development impact fees for costs related to new development. b. General-purpose rate increases for costs related to existing users. 6. Set water impact fees attributable to new development for residential and non-residential users based on"equivalent dwelling units." Key Assumptions The following tables detail the recommended funding strategy based on these key assumptions: General Plan 1. Build-out population of 56,000. 2. 1% annual growth rate. 3. New development must pay its fair share of the cost of facilities needed to serve it. Water Supply and Demand 1. Demand based on 145 gallons per day per capita. (Note: As described in the Water- Wastewater Element of the General Plan, this encompasses both residential and non- residential uses.) 2. Current safe annual yield of 7,735 acre-feet (without adjusting for siltation). Water Development.Impact Fees Page 6 3. Reliability reserve of 2,000 acre-feet annually and siltation allowance of 500 acre-feet at build-out. 4. Specific water sources are not allocated between existing users and new development based on the City's multi-source water policy(Section 7.0 of the Water-Wastewater Element). Step 1: New Water Supply Requirements The following three tables outline the City's additional water supply requirements and allocate them between existing users and new development on a prorated 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, 1,922 (51.6%) is attributable to existing users and 1,869 (48.4%) is attributable to new development. These three tables do this by: 1. Projecting demand based on a per capita planning ratio of 145 gallons per day per capita for existing users and new development. 2. Determining new water supply requirements based on: current safe annual yields; projected demand based on per capita planning ratios; reserve requirements; and siltation allowance 3. Allocating new water supply requirements between existing users and new development. Projected Demand Based on Per Capita Planning Ratio Table 1.1 Annaal AF - (J.145 Qailons Per Day Population Per Capin Perceat Existing Users(Based on Most Recent State Population Estimate) 44,613 7,246 79.7% New Development 11,387 1,849 20.3% Total 56,000 9,096 100.0% New Water Supply Requirements Table 1.2 Required Safe Annual Yield 9,096 Current Safe Annual Yield(Without Adjusting for Siltation) 7,735 Additional Safe Annual Yield Required Based on Per Capita Planning Ratio 1,361 Reliability Reserve 2,000 Siltation Allowance 500 Total 3,861 Allocation of New Supply Requirements Between Existing Users and New Development Table 1.3 - -- - - Existing New Users Development, _ Total New Supplies Based on Per Capita Planning Ratio 1,361 1,361 Reliability Reserve See Note 1,593 407 2,000 Siltation Allowance See Note 398 102 500 Total 1,992 1,869 31861 Percent 51.6%1 48.4%1 100.0% Reliability and siltation reserve allocated to existing users based on their ratio to total projected demand(79.7%). 11-12 Water Development Impact Fees Page 7 Step 2: Water Supply Solutions The following identifies two possible 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 used because: 1. Detailed design is underway for the Water Reuse Project and low-interest and grant funding has been already been secured for it. 2. The Nacimiento Pipeline project is the next one furthest along in the review process, and has been selected as the "leading one" by the Council at this time over the other supply alternatives such as the Salinas Reservoir expansion, groundwater and desalination. Safe Annual Yields(SAY)from Conceptual Source of Supply Solutions Table 2 AF SAY Water Reclamation Distribution System 1,013 Nacimiento Pipeline 2,848 Total 3,861 Step 3: Cost of New Water Supplies This schedule develops annualized costs for the two new water supply projects discussed above as well as the City's water conservation program. Water Reclamation Distribution System. Based on detailed plans to-date, this project has an estimated cost of$14.2 million. Of this amount, grant funding has been approved in the amount of$3.4 million, leaving a balance of$10.9 million to be funded locally. We will also receive a low-cost interest loan for this project at 3.0% for 20 years. Based on this annual debt service costs for this supply project are estimated to be $729,300. Nacimiento Pipeline. Projected costs for this project are based on preliminary annual costs per acre-foot developed by the County's engineering consultants for this project (Boyle Engineering) of$1,400 to $1,700 per acre-foot. The mid-point ($1,550 per acre foot) is used in this analysis. Based on 2,848, acre-feet, this results in annual costs of$4,413,700. Water 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. This is consistent with the Water-Wastewater Element and with the approach taken in the 1994 impact fee analysis. The cost for this is based on the 2001-03 Financial Plan program costs, adjusted for indirect costs and direct reimbursements for solid waste recycling support services. Summary of Annual Costs for New Water Supplies Table 3 Water Reclamation Distribution System 729,300 Nacimiento Pipeline 4,413,700 Conservation 392,100 Total $ 5,535,100 i Water Development Impact Fees Page 8 Step 4: 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 1.3: Cost Allocation Summary Between Existing and New Users Table 4 Pereent of Total Cost Existing Users 51.6% 2,855,500 New Development 48.4% 2,679,600 TOTAL 100.0% $5,535,100 Step 5: Funding Strategies The following schedules identify separate strategies for funding the costs of new water supplies for existing users and new development. 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. Three steps are involved in setting impact fees at appropriate levels: 1. Identify "equivalent dwelling units" (EDU's). Impact fees are attributable to residential as well as non-residential uses. The 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 (SFR) dwelling. As set forth in the summary below, residential EDU's are based on existing single and multi-family units and 1990 Census data for population per household (2000 Census data on this is not yet available). Based on 18,871 total dwelling units, this results in 17,131 existing residential EDU's. 2. Project annual increases in residential EDU's. Based on 17,131 existing residential EDU's, annual increases are projected at 1% per the City's General Plan growth management policies. This results in an increase of 172 residential EDU's per year through build-out. 3. Project annual increases in non-residential EDU's. Non-residential uses currently account for 35% of total water consumption. The annual growth in non-residential EDU's is projected proportionately, resulting in an additional 93 EDU's annually, for a total increase in EDU's per year of 265. The following table summarizes projected annual increases in equivalent dwelling units: J Water Development Impact Fees Page 9 Annual Growth in Equivalent Dwelling Units(EDU's) Table 5.1 Pop Per SFR Existing Anna§I EDU -Household - Equivalent Units EDU's Growth 1% Single Family Residential(SFR) 2.7I.0 10,172 10,172 102 Multi-Family Residential 2.1 0.8 8,699 6,959 70 Total Residential 18,871 17,131 172 Total Non-Residential @ 35%of Total Water Use 93 Total Estimated Annual Growth in Equivalent Dwelling Units 265 The next step in determining impact fees is to match the annual cost requirements for water supply improvements related to new development (Step 4) with the estimated annual growth in EDU's: Water Supply Impact Fee Requirement Table 5.2 impact Fee Per EDU Annual Supply Cost(Table 4) 2,679,600 Annual Equivalent Dwelling Units Table 5.1 265 Water Supply Impact Fee $ 10,112 This analysis results in an EDU impact fee for water supply of$10,112. 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: Projected Increases in General-Purpose Water Rates:.After 2005 Table 5.3 Rate Increase Rate-Based Revenues:2004-05 $ 8,644,700 New Annual Water Supply Costs Annual Water Supply Costs(Table 4) 2,855;500 Supply Costs Already in the Rate Base Water Reuse Debt Service 1,066,700 Groundwater Debt Service 473,000 Water Conservation Program 392,100 Total 1,931,800 Existing Users Share @ 51.6% 996,600 Net New Water Supply Costs 1,858,900 Required Rate Increase After 2004-05* 21.5% • This can be phased-in over several years:the most current rate review shows no rate increases in 1001-02 and 2002-03:and a 3%rate increase in 1003-04 and a 3%rate increase in 1004-05. As reflected above, funding the portion of water supply improvements related to existing users will require a general-purpose rate increase of 21.5%. The following summarizes the cost impact of this increase on the"average"single-family residential (SFR) customer: Water Development Impact Fees Page 10 Impact on"Average"Single Family Customer(Note 1) Table 5.4 -Billing Projected Average Monthly Bill:200405 Based on Most Recent Water Rate Review (Note 2) 26.68 Projected Average Monthly Bill:After 2004-05 Based on Addtional Water Supply Projects 32.42 Monthly Increase $ 5.74 1. Based on SFR average usage of 9 billing units per month. 2. Current SFR average is $25.15;projected rate for 2004-05 reflects planned rate increases of 3%in 1003-04 and 3%in 2004-05. It is important to note that these rate adjustments only apply to increased costs due to water supply capital improvements. They do not reflect rate increases that might otherwise be required due to other operating, maintenance or capital cost increases to meet the service needs of existing users. Step 6: Recommended Water Development Impact Fees As noted above, water impact fees are composed of three components related to servicing new development: supply, treatment and distribution. Costs for treatment and distribution system improvements have been separately developed as part of the Water Master Plan. Combining these with the water supply component and using the EDU concept for non-residential users based on meter size,the following summarizes current and proposed water impact fees. Proposed Water Development Impact Fee Table 6 Equivalent Water Treatment Total Dwelling Uniu Supply &Distribution Impact Fee Combined Pro"osed Fee:Water Supply,Treatment and Distribution Residential Single Family Residential 1.0 $ 10,112 $ 1,144 $ 11,256 Duplex,Townhouse,Condominium or Apartment 0.8 8,090 915 9,005 Mobile Home 0.6 6,067 686 6,754 Non-Residential Based on Meter Size 5/8 or 3/4 inches 1.0 10,112 1,144 11,256 1 inch 2.0 20,224 2,288 22,512 1 1/2 inches 4.0 40,448 4,576 45,024 2 inches 6.4 64,717 7,322 72,038 3 inches 14.0 141,568 16,016 157,584 4 inches 22.0 222,464 25,168 247,632 6 inches 1 45.0 1 455,040 1 51,480 1 506,520 .Comparison of.Current-andBro osed Fees._ . .._ _ Equivalent Water Impact Fees Dwelling Units Current Proposed Residential Single family residential 1.0 $7,059 $11,256 Duplex,townhouse,condominium or apartment 0.8 5,648 9,005 Mobile home 0.6 4,236 6,754 Non-residential based on meter size 5/8 or 3/4 inches 1.0 7,059 11,256 finch 2.0 14,118 22,512 1 1/2 inches 4.0 28,236 45,024 2 inches 6.4 45,179 72,038 3 inches 14.0 98,828 157;584 4 inches 22.0 155,301 247,632 6 inches 45.0 1 316,660 1 506,520 Water Development Impact Fees Page 11 COMPARISON OF PROPOSED FEES WITH OTHER AGENCIES Under the City's cost recovery policies, fee comparisons with other agencies should never be the sole (or even) primary criteria in setting City fees as there are many factors that affect how and why other communities have set their fees at their levels. For example: 1. What level of cost recovery is their fee intended to achieve compared with our cost recovery objectives? 2. What costs have been considered in computing the fees? 3. When was the last time that their fees were comprehensively evaluated? 4. What level of service do they provide compared with our service or performance standards? 5. What scope of services do they provide? 6. Is their rate structure significantly different than ours and what is it intended to achieve? Nonetheless, surveying the comparability of the City's fees to other communities provides useful background information. The following summarizes water impact fees for single-family residential units charged by other agencies in the County as well as by ten other cities in California we typically include in fee surveys because they share similar service and demographic characteristics with us. Other Agencies in San Luis Obispo County SFR Water Impact Fee Arroyo Grande $ 2,200 Atascadero Mutual Water Company 3,310 Cambria Community Services District 3,255 Grover Beach 632 Morro Bay 364 Paso Robles(Based solely on meter size;in San Luis Obispo,many SFR accounts have a I inch meter) 3/4 Inch Meter 3,606 1 Inch Meter 6,022 Pismo Beach 5,822 San Luis Obispo County (Depends on service area;this reflects the highest rate.) 3,500 Templeton Community Services District 3,642 City of San Luis Obispo Current 7,905 Proposed 11,265 �-/7 Water Development Impact Fees Page 12 Other Cities in California SFR Water Impact Fee Davis $ 1,280 Monterey(Does not provide water service) ** Napa 2,117 Palm Springs(Does not include treatment and supply;provided by regional wholesaler) 700 Petaluma(Depends on service area;this reflects the highest rate.) 3,435 Santa Cruz 3,356 Santa Barbara 3,063 Santa Maria 2,609 Ventura 3,743 Visalia (Does not provide water service) ** City of San Luis Obispo Current 7,905 Proposed 11,165 AFFECT OF PROPOSED FEES ON SAMPLE NON-RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS Under the City's water impact fee rate structure, non-residential use fees are determined by meter size. Compared with other options—such as building square footage by land use type— this has the advantage of more closing tying likely water use on a case-by-case basis to the fee amount. For example, a large automated assembly facility may have very little water demand, but would pay a large fee if it were based on building size. On the other hand, a smaller facility that uses large amounts of water in its manufacturing process would pay a smaller fee. Because of this, any samples must be based on meter size. However, samples can be developed based on"possible"meter sizes that might service various types of facilities. Using this approach, the following summarizes the impact of the proposed fees on three sample projects: retail project of 10,000 square feet requiring a 1 inch meter; office/business park project of 50,000 square feet requiring a 1.5 inch meter; and a manufacturing project of 100,000 square feet requiring a 2 inch meter. For each sample, the table below shows the current fee, the proposed fee and "add-on" amount if it were located in the Airport Area or Margarita Area (AA/MA). Non-Residential Water pact Fee Samples Square Meter Size Water I act Fee AA/MA Feet In Inches EDU Current Proposed Add-On Retail 15,000 1.0 2.0 14,118 22,512 1,492 Office-Business Park 50,000 1.5 4.0 28,236 45,024 2,984 Manufacturing 100,000 2.0 6.4 45,179 72,038 4,774 G:Water and Sewer Impact Fees/Water Impact Fees:2002 Update � -lg • Water System Master Plan City of San Luis Obispo Boyle Engineering Corporation Project Engineer N1,irk R-eitz, P1: • QAOfESS/pyo Quo P• 9 F � � s NO.28196 7D D1P.3-31-02 �f CML Q 9rF Of CA1.\ti��\ FR-S35-400-01 • October 2000 ����E 1044 E. Hemdon Avenue, Suite 108, Fresno, CA 93720 o Table of Contents Section 7 Introduction and Study Criteria 1.1 Background..........................................................................................................1-1 1.2 Purpose and Scope...............................................................................................1-2 1.3 Evaluation Criteria...............................................................................................1-3 1.3.1 System Performance Criteria and Modeling Parameters_........................1-3 1.3.2 Water Supply Regulations..........:..............................................................1-3 1.3.3 Water Supply Criteria............................................:...................................1-3 1.3.4 Water Storage Criteria.........:...... .....................................................:............1-5 1.3.5 Booster Pump Criteria.........................................................:....................1-6 1.3.6 Operational Criteria....:..............................................................................1-6 1.3.7 Development Scenarios....................................................................:.......1-7 Section 2 Water System Components and Demand Analysis 2.1 Existing Water Supply and Treatment Facilities..................................................2-1 2.2 Existing Water Distribution Facilities...................................................................2-1 2.3 Water Storage Facilities:......:..:.....:...:............................:.::......:.:.:.............:.........2-5 2.4 Pressure Zones..................................................................................................:...2-5 2.5 Water Demand Analysis.......................................................................................2-5 2.5.1 Historical Water Demand.........................................................................2-5 2.5.2 Water Demand Factors:..........................................................................2-12 2.5.3 Future Water Demand.:.::..........::.................:::.......................................2-16 Section 3 Raw Water Conveyance and Treatment Evaluation 3.1 General.................................................................................................................3-1 3.2 Background/Existing Plant Operations.......................:...:.....................................3-1 3.3 Raw Water Conveyance— Salinas Reservoir.......................................................3.5 3.4 Raw Water Conveyance—Whale Rock.Reservoir...............................................3-7 3.5 Forebay/Headworks .............................................................................................3-8 3.6 Ozonation/Primary Disinfection ..........................................................................3-9 • 3.7 Conventional Filtration/DirectFiltration Processes...........................................3-10 3.7.1 Coagulation............................................................................................3-10 FRS3540001/December 18,2001 �s 3.7.2 Flocculation............................................................................................3-10 3.7.3 Sedimentation Basins...............................................:......:...:..........::...:..3=11 3.7.4 Filtration.........................................................................:..,:......:...............3-12 3.7.5 Washwater Storage Tanks..:........:::..:.......:..........:..................................3-13 3.7.6 Washwater Recover Facilities................................................................3-14 3.8 Distribution System Residual (Secondary) Disinfection...................................3-18 3.10 Residuals Removal/Handling.............................................................................3-21 3.11 Plant Pumping Facilities.............................................................:....:.............:...:.3-22 3.12 Chemical Feed and Storage......................:............:.:...:.:. :.. :......::.:....................3-23 3.13 Standby Power/Reliability.....................:..............:..............::..............................3-24 3.14 Other Plant Reliability Concerns.........................................................................3-25 3.15 Intermittent Operation for Off Peak Power Cost Savings Versus Continuous (24 Hour) Operation...........................................................................................3-25 3.16 Buildout Plant Capacity .....................................................................................3-26 3.16.1 Ozone.Disinfection Basins..........:.......:............:::..:...........:....................3-26 3.16.2 Flocculation Basins....:.........:...............................:....................................3-26 3.16.3 Sedimentation Basins..............:..............................................................3-26 3.16.4 Filters......................................................................................................3-27 3.16.5 Washwater Recovery..............................................................................3-27 3.16.6 Washwater Storage............................................................:.........:....:.....3-27 3.17 Treated Water Quality........................................................................................3-27 3.18 CT Compliance..................................................................................................3-28 3.19 Water Supply Limitations....................................................:.............................3-29 3.20 Phasing Plan for Improvements.w......:.........................:.:.................................:...3-29 3.20.1 Phase I Studies .......................................................................................3-29 3.20.2 Phase II Improvements............................................................................3-29 3.20.3 Phase III Improvements .........................................................................3-30 Section 4 Water System Hydraulic Evaluation 4.1 Computer Model Development............................................................................4-1 4.2 Evaluation of Existing System with Existing Development Scenario.................4-2 4.3 Evaluation of Existing System with Buildout Development Scenario ..............4-21 4.5 Pump Station Evaluation...:................................................................................4-29 FRS3540061/December 18,2001 ii /3OVLE O4.6 Recommended Operational Changes..................................................................4-30 4.7 Service to Airport Area.........................................................................................4-31 4..7.1 Water System Impacts by Airport Area Development...........................4-32 Section 6 Capital Improvement Program 5.1 Capital Cost Estimates.................................................::.:...:.......:.................. ..:..5.1 5.2 Improvements for Further Study...............:...........:.....:....................:....................5-12 Section 6 Remote Registration Systems for City Water Meters 6.1 Purpose...........................::...:;.:.:............................................................................6-1 6.2 Hierarchy of Meter Reading Technology.,...........................................................6-1 6.3 AWWA Standards....:.:.:.:.:.....:.............................................................................6-2 6.4 Manufacturers.......................................................................................................6-3 6.5 Case Studies.........................................................................................................6-3 6.6 Summary................................................:...............::......:......................................6-5 Section 7 References Appendix • Pump Station Inspection Reports Pump Station Photographs Figures 1-1 Existing Land Use.......................................................................... .....................:::..........::...1.8 1-2 Land Use at Full Buildout..............:...:...:...::.:................:........................................................1-10 2-1 Existing Water System Hydraulic Profile..............................................................................2-2 2-2 Average Monthly Production for Seven Years....................................................................2-10 3-1 Process Flow Schematic (Existing)............................:,...:...........;.,.:......................................:.:.3-4 3-2 Water Source Hydraulic Profile.........:....................................................................................3-6 3-3 Process Flow Schematic(Proposed).........................:..........................................................3-15 3-4 Hydraulic Profile...................................................................................:...:..........................3-17 4-1 Storage Requirements for Major Reservoirs and Pressure Zones at ExistingConditions.................................................................................::..................:... ....4-19 42 Storage Requirements for Major Reservoirs and Pressure Zones at Buildout Conditions.................................................. .......................................................:......4-28 • FRS3540001/December 18,2001 c Tables 1-1 Performance Criteria and Modeling Parameters.........................:..........................................1-4 1-2 Summary of Land Use Areas....................................:................... ...........................................1-9 2-1 Existing Well Water Supply Facilities...................................................................................2-1 2-2 Existing Booster Pumping Station Facilities.......................................:..................................2-3 2-3 Pressure Regulating Valves....................................................................................................2-4 2-4 Existing Water Storage Facilities...........................................................................................2-6 2-5 Yearly Water Production Summary Since 1990......:,:::.. 2-6 Average Yearly Water Production Summary for City and Cal Poly.....................................2-9 2-7 Maximum Daily Production.................................................................................................2-11 2-8 Average Day Demand Factors Based on Land Use Classification......................................2-13 2-9 Water Demand by Pressure Zone, Existing Condition........................................................2-14 2-10 Fire Flow Guidelines.........................................................................................................:..2-15 2-11 Water Demand by Pressure Zone, Buildout Condition..:......................................................2-17 3-1 Water Supply.................................................:.............................................................:........:..3-2 3-2 Treatment Capacity................................................................................................................3-2 3-3 CT Requirements....................................................................................................................3-9 4-1 Model Calibration to 1997 Fire Flow Tests, Hydrant Locations...........................................4-3 4-2 Calibration to 1997 Fire Flow Tests, Model Results .............................................................4-4 4-3 Model Results for Maximum Day Demand Plus Fire Flow,Existing System....................4-11 4-4 Storage Requirements to Meet Existing Demands.........................................:::....................413 45 Booster Pumping Capacity to Provide Maximum Day Demand Plus Replace Fire and Emergency Storage Volumes Over Five Days at Existing Conditions.........................4-14 46 Emergency, Fire, and Operating Storage Requirements for Major Pressure Zones............418 4-7 Model Results for Maximum Day Demand Plus Fire Flow, Buildout System....................4-22 4-8 Storage Requirements to Meet Future Demands at Full Buildout.......................................4-24 4-9 Booster Pumping Capacity to Provide Maximum Day Demand Plus Replace Fire and Emergency Storage Volumes Over Five Days at Buildout Condition..........................4-25 5-1 Budgetary Capital Costs for Existing System Recommended Distribution System Improvements.........................................................................................................................5-2 5-2 Cost Estimating Factors, Water System Improvements............................:.:.....:....................5-3 5-3 Capital Costs for Buildout System, Recommended Improvements.......................................5-5 FRS3540001/December 18,2001 iv )BOWE • 54 Costs for Grid Main Improvements Required at Buildout for Airport and Margarita Areas and Other Areas Per General Plan.............:...............................:.................................5-6 5-5 Water Treatment Plant Capital and Study Costs for Recommended Improvements.............5-9 5-6 Capital Costs for Expansion of Water System to Serve the Proposed ................................5-11 Airport Area Buildout Plates 1 Existing Land Use.:...........................................................................................................Pouch 2 Land Use at Full Buildout.................................................................................................Pouch 3 Existing Water System(Plates 3-1 through 3-8)...............................................................Pouch 4 Existing Water System Main Trunk Lines..................................................:.......................Pouch 5 Proposed Improvements........................................................•---........................................Pouch • • FRS3540001/Deoember 18,2001 V f304�LE Section 1 Introduction and Study Criteria 1.1 Background For most of this century,much of what is now the Airport Area, generally located south of the city,was grazing land and field crops. The airport has grown from a small general aviation field to the principal commercial airport for the county. Available land and relatively low development costs have attracted many urban-type uses. At first,these urban-type uses needed space but minimal utility services. Recently,however,more intensive land uses have required greater services. Some property owners in the area now favor annexation to the city. The General Plan (updated in 1994) supports this,with land uses ranging from low-intensity recreational uses to fully served urban uses. Prior to annexation,a Specific Plan must be prepared for the Airport Area. The City of San Luis Obispo retained the firm of Wallace,Roberts and Todd, San Francisco,California, to prepare the Airport Area Specific Plan. The Airport Area is an 1,100-acre planning area outside the current city limits but within the urban reserve area. For a more detailed discussion of the planning process and results, refer to the Airport Area Specific Plan document. •To fully assess the impacts from the Airport Area on city infrastructure,master plan studies for the water, sewer, and drainage systems were prepared in conjunction with the Specific Plan. The sewer and storm drainage master plans were limited to only the Airport Area and surrounding areas. The Water System Master Plan study was to cover the entire city-wide water system including the water treatment facilities and raw water transmission pipelines. Boyle was retained by Wallace,Roberts and Todd to prepare this Water-System Master Plan and a focused Storm Drain System.Master Plan. This Water System Master Plan identifies phased system improvements based on a thorough technical assessment of the existing water system and the water system needed to satisfy city-wide General Plan development needs, including the Airport Area development needs. The specific challenges facing the City in making decisions concerning upgrades to its water system include: • Improved water delivery and distribution operations to minimize pumping costs at the treatment plant and to improve water service to City customers. • Operation of the distribution system in recognition of the fragile nature of the older portions of the system. • Determination of the storage capacity needed to satisfy fire,emergency,and operational demands. • • Identification of deficient segments of the system and upgrades needed to meet current water works and public health standards. FRS3540001/December 18,2001 • • Assessment of water improvements needed to meet demands of existing development, "in-fill" development. and several larger area developments, including the Airport Area. 10 These critical issues demonstrate that there are many factors that must be considered conjunctively to produce a working document from which the City Council can make informed decisions concerning the future of the water system. The Water System Master Plan was initiated to identify phased system improvements based on a thorough technical assessment of the overall water system. This is not an evaluation of water supply needs, which is addressed in the City's Urban Water Management Plan and the Water Management Element to the General Plan. The evaluation of the raw water conveyance facilities,the water treatment plant operations, and siorage requirements to meet California drinking water standards is also included. 1.2 Purpose and Scope The City authorized Boyle Engineering Corporation to prepare the Water System Master Plan through subcontract to Wallace,Roberts, and Todd,the lead planning consultant for the Airport Area Specific Plan. The overall purpose of the water master plan is to identify system improvements which will satisfy the following goals and objectives: • Identify existing system deficiencies and present an implementation plan for needed improvements. • Identify facilities needed to serve the larger development areas of the Airport,Margarita, and Edna/Islay areas and other expansion areas(Orcutt, Irish Hills, and Dalidio-Madonna-McBride) and an implementation plan for needed improvements. • Improve overall water system supply operations, including raw water delivery,treatment, distribution, storage, and minimization of pumping at the treatment plant and other locations within the distribution system. • Provide a Capital Improvement Plan to provide for implementation of needed improvements per a coordinated long-term plan, including replacement of aged components. • Determine system storage to meet fire flow, emergency,and operational requirements. • Prioritize capital expenditures. • Recommend improvements to reduce long-tern operating and maintenance costs. The Scope of Work for the Water System Master Plan was divided into the following major tasks: Task I - Data Collection and Evaluation Task 2 -Raw Water Conveyance Analysis Task 3 - Water Treatment Plant Analysis Task 4 - Distribution System Computer Modeling Task 5 - Water Master Plan Report Preparation , J FRS3540001/Deoember 18,2001 1-2 F30VLE •1.3 Evaluation Criteria Various criteria are used in the analysis of domestic water systems such as the City's. A discussion of the various evaluation criteria parameters is presented in the following sections. 1.3.1 System Performance Criteria and Modeling Parameters Table 1-1 provides a summary of the evaluation criteria and modeling parameters used in this study. Some of the parameters shown in the table are maximum or minimum limits used to assist in the hydraulic analysis. Normal design values for these parameters that are used for modeling and design are also shown. A section of the City is considered "deficient"if it cannot meet the criteria listed.. Upgrades are recommended to improve system performance such that this performance criteria can be met. The decisions as to which upgrades will be implemented and their schedule will ultimately be made by City Council based on economics and risk versus overall benefit to the consumers. 1.3.2 Water Supply Regulations Many of the criteria utilized in this study are waterworks standards as set forth by the American Water Works Association(AWWA) and the State of California Water Works Standards(California Code of Regulations Title 22 and Health and Safety Codes). These standards establish such things as storage, supply, and hydraulic capacity requirements. Other evaluation criteria were based on the Uniform Fire and Plumbing Codes(water system pressures), input from the City Fire Department(fire flow criteria), City Community Development Department(population and development projections),and City.Utilities Department(water facility operating parameters). Water treatment regulations are discussed in Section 3. 1.3.3 Water Supply Criteria Water supplies for the city water system must be capable of meeting system demands and include standby capacity to meet the reliability requirements of the State Waterworks Standards. This criteria applies to the overall city water supply as well as to supplies for individual pressure zones. Simply stated,available supply capacity must be greater than demand,as follows: • Available water supply capacity is defined as the total source capacity. In the case of San Luis Obispo,this source is the single water treatment plant(augmented by a few wells). Because the city is primarily dependent on the treatment plant, an auxiliary power system should be provided to maintain the treatment process and delivery system even in the event of a prolonged power outage. An assessment of the present auxiliary power capabilities at the treatment plant and recommendations for improvements is discussed in Section 3. • Based on waterworks industry standards for municipalities, required water supply capacity (treatment plant) is taken to be the sum of maximum day demand flow plus an additional flow sufficient to replenish the required fire and emergency storage volumes within five(5) days. This criteria was used to evaluate the City's water supply system facilities. FRS3540001/December 18,2001 1-3 130VLE o LL c fi 3 � •o o E d CL 0 L m O C CLrc ; C ai 0 C N N C O c 'D E C C O _aN m O C a) _ .a a7 C V C N.'N6 N 'O w o 7 O) E �0 E � co C QC U O N Of m a) O C E 3 E _a v ; E o ca o U > 0 3 ° c c E3Y N L. E. C a) a) C N a) 0 0 C E 10 w O C O R E p 'O C A W o aE :3 c a) — 0 3 0 w xcc > a) a) "D $Do L a) O to 'C '= a) C E N m r E 7 7 y y 0 eo C d - _ _ C CL m 0 0 N. Q « U « « `0 � 3 •m � 5 eco � C > �cl � as N ma c c cm tm m c c c e d 0CL r.m c N = c E N E y o E U y v 0) 0 ° 0° � vvv N m u c CX 3 M a�oi e= M m 0 7 3EEE 7 7 3 E. E E E 0 O O O N c r y d CO L 0 E E E0 E E £ E a°i m � m m �C mmcxom � � � cxocXam eyam > > CO) `0 ? yon R � `a �_� � � iT.,�.� � � m. . L) CL mdZY L `o (Go M y 3 aim 3 E rn 0 m •X J C E •o m e 3 CL 0CD dddC cl N N 00_ _00 E _ « .O .to E C E 119 � � N LO 0 cel 0 coO � O CL � rrr C C C NO N � « Cr ._�. O 0 N £. E d C U m O V 06 CL O A O fn •o Z E c U m Nto C 7 a) a N L E .0 -b V O c 0 C C O O (A a) y V Q) > i N E to cc � w +rE1 10 Omm of U dcm Oof O C y N y N E d y E o - c o. -O d o o > > 0 n m _ c U H m LL " > cm 0 N C N C 7 p N y 06 C9. J C C V a1 e- O N ' S 0 3 c_0 � £ 2 C7 oyes° H � Nc m ea N 0 c _0 r m Y- y - 0 cli a� a� Ndc t'i 0 CN > L O• 01 N '� �j 3 N O y E N y N C N m m m 3 r' O m o i v c c c m � c v a CO N X10 °a c .0 a 4) a N a) N O m f0 eNa E' — N a d c y m L y LL •In modeling the hydraulic capacity of the water system,the following criteria were used: • A maximum day demand condition was assumed during fire flow simulations. • Fire flow conditions for the required durations must be met from storage only(no pumping) while maintaining a minimum pressure of 20 pounds per square inch(psi)throughout the system. Existing booster pumps are not provided with permanent auxiliary power systems that would automatically start during a power outage. • Peak hour demand conditions must be met from storage and pumping while maintaining a minimum pressure of 35 psi throughout the system. This supply criteria is used to simulate typical peak hour conditions during the summer months. 1.3.4 Water Storage Criteria The total usable storage capacity in the city water system must meet the required storage as set forth in the State Waterworks Standards. The criteria used to evaluate water system storage included: • Usable volume of a storage tank was divided into three parts. The first part was taken to be from the bottom of the tank to a level equivalent to the calculated emergency storage volume (50 gpcpd for 3 days). The second part was taken to be from the top of the emergency storage level to a volume equivalent to the maximum fire flow volume required for the pressure zone(s) G served by the tank. The City has 15 pressure zones throughout the distribution system due to the varying topography. The third level was taken to be from the top of the fire storage volume to a volume equivalent to the daily operational storage(14 hours at the difference between the peak hourly demand and the maximum daily demand flow rates). This third volume amount also translates in most cases to the volume between the booster pump on and off settings that supply that tank. • Emergency storage equal to 50 gallons per capita per day(gpcpd) for 3 days plus daily operational storage of 14 hours of the difference between peak hour and maximum day demand must be met. This storage criteria is used to simulate loss of power or other catastrophic event at the booster pumps and the treatment plant in an emergency. • Maximum tank capacity is defined as the volume within a tank from floor approximately 1 to 0.5 feet below the overflow level. • FRS35400o1lDecember 18,200 1 1-5 ROYLE Required storage capacity includes fire, operating, and emergency storage components as follows. O Storage Component Required Capacity Gallons Fire storage Required fire flow and duration per Table 2-10 Emergency storage 3 days 50 gpcpd Operating storage 14 hours of difference between peak hour and maximum day demands PHD—NIDD based on diurnal curve These volumes are cumulative. Therefore,the storage volumes for existing and proposed reservoirs are evaluated based on the sum of these required components. The value of 50 gpcpd is based on the assumption that during an emergency, such as extended power outages, earthquake, or other natural disasters,the public would become aware of the need to conserve water via civil defense announcements, etc. The 50-gpcpd value, is equal to approximately one-third of the ADD of 145 gpcpd value. The 145-gpcpd figure is the City's adopted water use rate for planning purposes. During this time, it is also assumed that certain critical water supply facilities, such as the water treatment plant and the larger booster stations,would be powered by portable or permanent auxiliary generators. The auxiliary power capabilities at the surface water treatment plant are further discussed in Section 3. 1.3.5 Booster Rump Criteria The City has ten booster pumping stations which are used to fill various storage reservoirs at higher elevations throughout the distribution system. These booster pumps must be sized such that they are able to meet maximum day demand plus replenish the fire and emergency storage volumes within a five- day period. 1.3.6 Operational Criteria Operational parameters for the existing water facilities were used to approximate actual field conditions as much as possible in the model. These operational parameters include existing pressure/reservoir level/pump on-off settings or other conditions of existing facilities, as provided by the City Utilities Department. Booster pumps were simulated using nominal pump capacities as given by the City with estimated total dynamic head (TDH)values estimated from various model runs. In the future, it is recommended that the City install pressure gauges and flow meters at the booster pump stations to determine actual pumping conditions. These values would then be input into the model as pump curves for greater model accuracy. Summarized below are the water level parameters that may be used in storage tanks for the various water demand conditions modeled. FRS3540001/December 18,2001 1-6 /30VLE System Demand Condition Tank Level Average day demand Minimum operating storage level Maximum day demand Midpoint of operating storage bandZ Peak hour demand Minimum operating storage level' Maximum day plus fire demand Minimum fire storage Ievel3 'Minimum operating level is the water level in a storage tank which triggers booster pumps to begin refilling. ''Midpoint level is the water level in a storage tank midway between the start and stop levels for the booster pump filling the tank. ;Minimum fire storage level is the water level at the bottom of the portion of the storage tank volume set aside for maintaining fire flows. 1.3.7 Development Scenarios Two development scenarios were used to generate water demands for the analysis of the city's water system. One scenario assumed existing development and water demand conditions. The second scenario assumed full buildout development conditions as allowed by the city's current General Plan including planned development in the Airport Area. Existing land use areas and their classifications throughout the city are shown on Figure 1-1 and Plate 1 (pocket in back of report). Table 1-2 includes a summary of existing and buildout land use areas, and shows that there are approximately 6,219 acres of existing development served by the water system, of which 640 acres are vacant. The county airport and Cal Poly,which are private water systems but served by the City,are not included in this acreage total. There is a total of 7,355 acres that will be served by the water system at full buildout. The Airport Area includes approximately 1,100 acres of future development area. Approximately 382 acres of this Airport Area future development is made up of the County airport and area immediately surrounding it, which will be served by the County's private water system. The Margarita Area includes about 418 acres of future development area. Figure 1-2 and Plate 2 (pocket in back of report)shows the land use areas and their classifications under the full buildout scenario. . Vacant parcels and future development size and locations were provided by the City Community Development Department and as developed by the project planning team for the Airport Area Specific Plan. Some of the key assumptions made in developing the buildout development scenario included: • The full buildout land uses shown in Figure 1-2 and Plate 2 agree with the current General Plan for land use areas and classifications. • All existing vacant parcels will be 100 percent developed at full buildout. • The Airport Area Specific Plan as developed by the project team establishes the future development in the southern portion of the city. This planning assumption is reflected in the General Plan. • Edna/Islay Area development per the previously prepared specific plan and as shown in the General Plan. • Margarita Area development as identified by the City Community Development Department and as shown in the General Plan. • FRS3540001/Deoember 18,2001 1-7 g®��� F `fit. v a L i z w c.• t � a r s i Z.iz` i Myr Y k,4 v t t +d M t, b LEGEND Q PRESSURE ZONE AND NUMBER eXW=LAIM USE C A$3F=TVN a,, OPEN SPACE ®INTERIM OPEN SPACE 'OPEN SPACE PARK RECREATION PUBLIC FACILITY ECJiL6 RURAL SUBURBAN LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIALMEDIUM DENSITY fi jNTIAL ,r }Q( MEWM-HIGH DENSITY YRRESIDENTIAL �i "•m lws HGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL II NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL JWG OFFICE JW WATER SYSTEM MASTER P RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE-MANUFACTURING EXISTING LAND USE W-W-BUSINESS PARK v TOURIST FIGURE 14 Boip%e 1-8 W J • M� W w Cco 7 � 0 � � CO v CO N LLQ. O 0) O FA N CO O O C7 ri K W O N LO 0 CV O N0 m N O N m O N O O atj 0 C7 CD C) CA N O N N C'7 M N A m tl) ^M C ` �Opp O U .W. C p a0 CD O O O Q. O O) O to tD a0 ` N O to O co M 'T 4m C O '7 O f7 C O f6 2 V O N t` CO O O N O CD O O O O CD O V Cj Q W a r CV N O CO N r CD CC CND lLa Q a) N 4) O ' C la ~ J � O w 'O � C cc E c 3 l9 al al c. r CL _ C S CCl.Cl cO CU 0' ON O y '00 m N � L � lC LO D O O O L � t co H -0a) m a o y m Mm m L °O $ a a : 0 c _ ffi eCL a eo c g c o aa'i io d � m m v c mcl c 3 L � m 0 3 = c w c m L °? o m ami '� ff��� 01 m ani v a2i o m o c mUC9 = c � 22 0ILIfIX co n g C4 N r . O O m X M N y .Q? W .0 U v P S s i l ^ ^ r- � p 5. l e �� ye ' a�Y e^ry �•.w.. t w d p b . J ^ v, f k K i.. a i .a:„r .d.a. � F' i -.�a.✓ b ,Awa^ ,a^ , l^i I LEGEND p PRESSURE ZONE AND NUMBER EXMTI NG LAND USE 0 A3SMATION :r,OPEN SPACE INTERIM OPEN SPACE 'OPEN SPACE @qg =PARK m^;RECREATION PUBLIC FACILITY RURAL SUBURBAN LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MO SCALE MEDIUM44IGH DENSITY RESIDENTAL KMH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL _ NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL FM OFFICE crcy of GENERAL RETAIL RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD Sart LCIS OBISpo ESS PAW CtURtNG TOURIST WATER SYSTEM MASTER PLAN E VACANT LAND USE AT FULL BUILDOUT FIGURE 1-2 8042E CGRPORHT70R i } � o • Other future major developments were identified by the City Community Development Department and as shown in the General Plan. • Future development"in-fill"per the General Plan. O 0 FRS3540001/December 18,2001 1-11 f30�LE o Section 2 0 Water System Components and Demand Analysis 2.1 Existing Water Supply and Treatment Facilities The city water system is composed of water supply,treatment,distribution, and storage facilities. The existing city water system is made up of raw water supply from Whale Rock and Salinas Reservoirs,the Sterner Canyon water treatment plant, and four groundwater wells. A summary of the existing water well supply facilities is given in Table 2-1. The existing treatment facilities are discussed further in Section 3. The locations of these facilities are shown on Plates 3-1 through 3-8 (pocket in back of report). A hydraulic profile of the existing water system is shown on Figure 2-1. Table 2-1 Existing Well Water Supply Facilities Capacity Pressure Zone Name and Location m • 345 Edna Saddle Fire Station#4 78 345 Edna Saddle Pacific Beach#1 88 345 Edna Saddle Pacific Beach#2 —* 345 Edna Saddle Calle Joaquin —* 385 Downtown I Mitchell Park 36 *Not in service. 2.2 Existing Water Distribution Facilities The city's existing water distribution facilities include 13 reservoirs, 10 booster pumping stations, 20 pressure regulating stations,and a total of approximately 150 miles of pipeline. There is a total of approximately 110 miles of modeled distribution pipelines ranging from 2 to 12-inch diameter. Of the pipelines modeled, about 20 miles are 4- and 6-inch diameter, 57 miles are 8-inch diameter, and about 33 miles are 10- and 12-inch diameter. Older pipelines are cast iron, asbestos cement, ductile iron,or a small amount of steel material, and newer pipelines are typically polyvinyl chloride(PVC). The existing water distribution system pipelines are shown on Plates 3-1 through 3-8. A hydraulic profile of the existing water system showing reservoirs,pressure-reducing valves, and booster pump stations is shown on Figure 2-1. Table 2-2 summarizes the existing booster pumping station facilities. Table 2-3 s„r„marizes the existing pressure regulating station facilities. The city's existing water transmission system includes a number larger diameter(16 through 27-inch) ^ "backbone"pipelines. These backbone pipelines are critical for providing capacity for water ) transmission and fire flow demands,which are typically larger than localized demands at any given area- FRS3540001/December 18,2001 2-1 R®VLE ELEVATION FEET ABOVE SEA LEVE u k 0 8 0 0 0 0 §Z \� z m 2 = »k ^§$C >Q� w aj Z 3 s � . 4 O R§ / m ° . �& t�6 5" ? 2 ( % §2 . . ) n §§ / m g g M 2� 2 ]k °a § % § � - ■ ■ 7 0 / » ° 2 0(n z100IL ■ � r � m 4 <- �>k . z Moo §@ � » carrl �- �» » � ops 0� �5 | o z . .. . � o 2 0 m §� 7) �� /�z k. m - m a- � .4 • 2 � 2 tj 2 � _� � ) " ` � g � . o � � > « 0 ao §% § Sƒ%§ °�( ° 2 $ 2FFq E . F CK, 0 8 ® 0 ) £ § z< 2m� o o z rf= -� o § Ik g z. z cow 0 » ■ (nr ` > z �.4j � k -02 o = z� 0Jho 22 Q -DMz\ k§ > ■ CA N ° ° d « 2 / M CD gq�® .� z � no > M q 7 k� � > > $�/ t A c 0 - -- - >®■} ` r- z I§k§ k §k �/rn \ U)| M ;0 �I §$- % § 2 a. m m% 0 . 0 §a . _» m . _ <M §b c 00 Ln 00(n w�= ■ » OZE $ _ . 0 kms | \ z \ zM > § Xd� 8 f r m F < U 8 8 8 p 8 0 8 O C } oa O Has0om )n �mm � °' _ . m OD .� O N ao � i C m _w O 0f � O w O E C N N N C7 N N N N N N Z a to Ln to t m m O = w Rm o FL - Ln 0 0 � p �. N O < O m £ p 00 °0 00 N a!S N a0 00 1 Z W L R cm N 00 Go 00 �7 00 N. 00 O � o U mem IV m - _ O0 a O. = N � � E O Q � co Ca c � d CL J a m a a o p O •- N m v u� c O D eb 0) •- •- •- co nom a a a a a a a a a w m E22222227- d o = a. aaao. aaaa a� x 3 VLU C m _� c N A = d U) t m w c c=1 Za . e o m c m = E 0 cmc Cc40I= L � � � o oa) a0 = mcnxcoLL < rz � a � m m y 'O OC a N O Ed C E N N E o, O 07 c 'O 0) '.V-. l0 C FA 0) 0) W O C = E 01 ..8 H - 8 M fA �- O a n 0 7 y C 7 N Z a m Cl)0. E a to CO c a c c y r p m O o m m c L E r U o aY O E r U c 'E M' u 03 g W !L m 2 H m 1L Q a' IOL a' t c c w U) m O N f7 Q t0 m 1-: 00 O) O 00 W a Z = 0 N LL m W Ec m — � O m R O O O O d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 £ E o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 •- ou� oo� rnaccominrnrnorn � mm � � � EG C6 P,: aomvv '.7 C6 C6 vvF.: v � ri rir' c6 mLL m c E 0 m m v m v m ma aOO wU00 i C N O co cD M ymp en c0 O mO t) m OMU Y P- S O n O O O m 0 C C) m U OLn O U o Ca El Ii m r m v H � a R1 N m C m� t� C N # N N N N # p �k _ 3tik �k4k _ _ .: OD L c w m _ 3 3 3 S 2 it ik -LO mv, ^ i-6 a R l�, m o 0 0 0 0 0 . m m = R c a c 3 t 3 3 3 3 c R 'o 0 # C t O O y m ff) fA O +.. .R.. 'O O y 0 0 0 0 p� y m 0 0 01 01 m 41 C O R W d W ❑ H ❑ O ❑ ❑ U! LLLL W' M' W" 02 'O > 1.0 R Y N O � _ 7 7 3 7 7 3 7 N N in m d I _ _ 41 # m m N N N y N N # C O) R m 2 O m m 0 0 —` Fpm LL � � rL # R oaan. aan. a`. a C C •C N (p 3 C 0 0 0 m L L L L L L L L t L t 'E c > p O d G7 O O O d ._ m ._ ._ ._ ._ct ._ ._ m m y m - - R a C di y W g000NCO0{ 0N N NM I T R ANO m y 'O , N M N N N N CEJ A en 4 g m m Ln in CD V r� CO 0 - = O oggqqqqo . oq � oc? ooggqq > c () jp N M M er < 6 OD � r �- r r r r r •- N N M > CD y 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '- .- �- r •- C d E O O w L c C r 6 C C C C C 6 c e e c N co m 6 O R E a > N r w C C � R a E c N C O m E y N O N L O C C m 10tM y V R O C R •y Q1 �4 Nl C ca 0 �p m O � = C •L O «. E 7 = Z C O C • r ' U C w 0 OC1 .G C ca ca O. R m ,C O 3 C R R fn 7 •p •O Z = •a 3 c m 2 E am > > ani � V cLLmcda c � a °a '� a6O cpmcad > m c ca 06 Rad o R � cc R H c y °dve3 o Q8 0 .jd�O N 2 t V L C CT �2�pp. .L L C O. J CO J C C C O C a+ O O R �p B C t 0 R C �p C t W O V —>, � mmUa = C7 ILld9 U. CDUt� wtOlOJy � w m E E � X m � t m m � N CM Q tp m I� ODC (V M y m t� c0 Of C r •- r r �– �– N in a U H H u- A n to r Cin the system. The backbone pipelines and the 14-inch and 12-inch distribution mains are shown on ' Plate 4 and are briefly described as follows: • Approximately 3,500 feet of 27-inch diameter pipeline from the Stenner Canyon WTP to the Transfer Pumping Station. • Approximately 17,800 feet of 24-inch and 9,660 feet of 16-inch-diameter pipeline from the Transfer Pumping Station to Reservoir#2 and to the High Pressure Zone ending at the Terrace Hill Tank. • Approximately 4,800 feet of 27-inch, 12,200 feet of 20-inch, and 3,100 feet of 18-inch-diameter pipeline from the Transfer Pumping Station to the Foothill Zone, Downtown Zone, and Edna Saddle Zone ending at the Madonna/Higuera PRV. • Approximately 5,600 feet of 20-inch and 3,500 feet of 16-inch-diameter pipeline from the Edna Saddle Reservoir to the Edna Saddle Zone. • Approximately 4,400 feet of 16-inch-diameter pipeline from the Terrace Hill Tank to the Terrace Hill Zone. • Approximately 123,800 feet of 14- and 12-inch-diameter distribution mains. 2.3 Water Storage Facilities The city's existing water storage facilities include 13 reservoirs and tanks with a total nominal capacity of approximately 24 million gallons (MG). A summary of the existing water storage facilities is given in Table 2-4. The locations of these facilities are shown on Plates 3-1 through 3-8. .A hydraulic profile of the existing water system is shown on Figure 2-1. 2.4 Pressure Zones The city's existing water system is divided into 15 pressure zones, as depicted on Plate 1, Plates 3-1 through 3-8, and Figure 2-1. Other points of supply include storage tanks,pressure regulating devices, and booster pumps for each.zone are listed in Tables 2.2,2-3 and 2-4. 2.5 Water Demand Analysis An analysis of historical water production and consumption within the city, and projections for future buildout water demands,are discussed in the following sections. 2.5.1 Historical Water Demand Water demand is often quantified by either water production or water consumption records. Water Cproduction is the quantity of water delivered from water sources such as wells and treatment plants. Water production and consumption represent measurements of water entering the system (production) or FRS3540001/December 18,2001 2-5 FOYLE !a WO M LO O M N M O �+ T Lo _ >� cgi v v c u 0 0 X 0 0 0 i � J J MLn } M m 0 Ln Q O T N O CD M N O) M M M 0 M CA n M M LO LO MCD n o W m d O m m M t0 N_ M M M M O) )n OD J J C M Q lv Y�7 too tf A M T d' C O O w 10 _O M M N m M CMD v 'T O CD OW M ccc c o Ix Ix O � + O Q )n N N I" M In f, N CO O d = S N O) CO N O M M MM t0 �p N t C7 1L >m M M M cn M V to Cp m m m d N � VM O N ID 'T N m V' t0 to la E '� O fV O X M X CO N N i m LL {p �^., Ln CO N T in N N. N N IV yy� 4) 0 M L C i cCM m m O.2 O � > w mw >, n m c 0 mem 00 cl) rte) w aND aMo o o o � � CD o r �' 0 o. X c� v 0 0 0 m 0 0 0 o 0 0 m J IM V a C: M CO `° 3 c m pKO > W '' j ' O co i O O M O h 0 0 r� C 0 W m w o O M M O T O to T T V R > W < C O r, a 0 Cl C )- 0 0 t C UO W _ C C O N m W 4 M MLO T T Q cn Ln Q Q m T an Qm C? 0 09 F- O Q m d m M M to � CO O o T cm cn v In i N mm 0 N c Ln > CL C m y N Y O ?+ M cn � 0 C .07.. ui a) C co d' a) O N .0 Y C w 7O _ C l6 CO m Y t) m cm C Y ~ N C t0 fC W O p C O O co CIA O c ~ AO O H O O O O m W m = $ U (o C Y 2 c = = E Z o �. m Q m CL r m �o W m m CD 3 `m m 4)) at) ani m o m ° c m c o m a W °1 It ,_ m W w co U- .Q d' = t m UU Oa fV M 7f0 t_: C61 O) O �-. N .� V m �. O jr T T T T T Cleaving the system(consumption). Water consumption is the quantity of water actually used by 'consumers,and is typically determined from meter records. Water consumption is less than water production. The difference between production and consumption usually results from accounting and/or .metering inaccuracies,water lost through small leaks in the system,and from minor unaccounted for use such as pipeline flushing, hydrant testing, fire fighting, and street cleaning. This difference for a typical domestic system is approximately 10 percent of total water production. Table 2-5 lists historical city water production trends for eight years(1990-1997). Water production is divided into the various sources such as the Salinas and Whale Rock reservoirs and groundwater wells as discussed in Section 3. Table 2-6 lists historical water production for the city and for California Polytechnic University, which has four metered service connections to the city system. Cal Poly has an on-campus distribution system which includes on-campus storage. Per-capita water production values for the city are also given in Table 2-6. A monthly hydrograph showing average monthly production over the same period of 1990 to 1997 is included as Figure 2.2. Based on these records: • 1997 average day demand=6,868 AFY(6.13 MGD) =4,260 gpm • 1997 average month demand=572 AFM(6.13 MGD) • 1997 maximum month (October)= 690 AFM(7.25 MGD)= 1.2 times average day demand Included in Table 2-7 are the maximum daily production flow records for the water treatment plant. The maximum day demand (NIDD)occurred in July 1985, which was 11.57 MGD. Since 1985,the MDD has gradually decreased to a low of 7.08 MGD,which occurred in July 1993. The MDD has then increased yearly to approximately 9.72 MGD in 1997. Maximum day demands are typically subject to C'yearly variations that occur due to circumstances such as weather and community activities. The City has implemented water conservation measures, which have reduced the total yearly water demand as well as the maximum day demands. The maximum day factors shown in Table 2-7 for years 1990 through 1997 illustrate the fluctuations in this factor of between 1.94 and 1.42. A maximum day demand factor of 2.0 times the average day demand was therefore chosen as appropriate for master planning and modeling for the future. Analysis of the data presented in Tables 2-5 and 2-6 and Figure 2-2 offers the following conclusions: • Per-capita water production for the city in 1997 equaled 132.gpcpd. • Average day demand for the city in 1997 equaled approximately 3,860 gpm,and for Cal Poly it equaled approximately 400 gpm,or 9.5%of the total production. • Seasonal variation of city water demand is typical of areas with warm summer months and cool winter months. • The city-wide maximum day demand peaking factor has averaged about 1.61 over the past eight years, and has been as high as 1.94. The above values are comparable to other communities in San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, and Ventura Counties. FRS3540001/December 18,2001 2-7 lS8'rLE W J to � MMEm � rnt°n° a�omu t°o° CL W CO N Q to n O N m N N CO tD M M co T a d G ti v U) CO 0 N 0) m Em E CD cmr*-d q -V mi V' In Ln Ln 0 Q O to O .- CO . n CO M M r- aD CD O Q M n M m . O CO ch 0 r- 0 O 10 ao p) w to to to cD Qd6 cd . r am « 5 m Mtn LO m (nvr) gao « E = Qrnrnlgv (DLUOn � o l6 ; O` to N N M M N 00 N C9 C CSC O ~ 3 V N O O N O Q O N � c!) O J d m Q f` O co N N CO* O N �. l6 tp R f0 c0 r. O « N m O M �- N � O U m W coC%j M 0 v NCV) N m 0 Q O N n �" C O co LON ch c7 W 0 N !" N < M r tr C LO 0) LO v w R O O h sT O) N < O V C cn M ci O Q sY IL g O e-0) mr N M R lc)m N t. } O O W N W � W N a y O x N � a LL W _l C m m m CL M CO U) N CM V L 0) CL d > > N O) N m £ e ,,LL aq c CD ccda °� � oa�on tn Ln I � � t V m R 3 m O N p �. O m d °m' (D 04 Qm Ci � rnnr'0tow O O r N ui ei ui ui m 3 C m V !0 } � N 0) OS 0 p� C to 0 M O W cc V Q w V M M S - N C c IT v a 0 a �o U 10 CD O O) C) m m W O O T 0) 0) 7 x X W 0 0 m N m CB L N N Dpi J N f� O = 7 O O aQ U �CO w m N E v Q v C z � Z O U 7 g U CL L t lC c O � £ a m w > m N a L w Q _ O0 L C C a CD 0 A� w 0 d a Im ea L m Ix CL m m w LL z 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD LO M N (� tl)uo�npoJd GSeJantl w J O m' O w Q CD N N O M W 4? n CO vx to to M Q O m {L C C OJ v Co O N 0 O r- CO t- O V n O co M R a tC) CO U) N n m 7 00 1� M 1 U N O to to n M 01 CO (o. m n 0 C ►� CO n ti h to In to 0 -Ii 0 Ln O fD �. C d 0 t0 0� m o m O 3 C7 � If Ono 000 000 0 00 0 n oD CA n N N Q m 3 X O O, O O 00 n n Ih 6 00 00 O) cc m W O N 0 7► > � W O E a E J X w m > N H N tl) 7L cc C C C O y ' Q 4 0 0 1113 0 0 O A 3 ' N L Y N O U L to tD n O CA O N l'7 V CO CO t- U- -� OD O OO m O OD W CA CA O O O CA D7 �. CA O O O) CA Of CA O CA 0) W CA O CA 0 7 X t0 _ o 0 N cc a O o � m LL 20, 2.5.2 Water Demand Factors Water demand factors used to calculate average annual water demand throughout the system were developed using factors from other coastal cities, historical demand and consumption data and existing land use within the city. Water use pumping records were also analyzed for various city areas (pressure zones)that are of a single land use type to check daily water use records. These water use records during the months of March and April (closest to average day use) were compared to the acreages within the area to determine water use factors in gpm/acre for similar land use types. These factors were also used to estimate future water demands based on anticipated buildout development. A city-wide per capita use factor of 145 gpcpd was used in accordance with the adopted Urban Water Management Plan to determine total demands. Land use demand coefficients were then used to determine the distribution of the total demand across the city.. Average water demand factors used in this study are listed in Table 2-8. These factors vary throughout the city due to different development density,terrain,private landscaping, and water use practices. Seasonal and daily water demands vary as compared to the average daily water demand(ADD). Maximum day demand and peak hour demand peaking factors were established to simulate different system conditions. These factors are multiplied by the ADD. A maximum day demand(MDD)peaking factor of 2.0 was used in the hydraulic analysis, as discussed in Section 2.5.1. A peak hour demand (PHD)factor of 2.75 times ADD was used. These peaking factors are typical of Central California coastal communities with metered services,fairly high water rates; and which experience moderately wane summer months and cooler winter months. San Luis Obispo also does not have a restricted lawn watering ordinance. These ordinances often artificially increase peak hourly demands. In addition to demands on the water system calculated from the land use water demand factors discussed above,certain point demands such as California Polytechnic University were also incorporated into the system modeling. These demands are applied at specific points on the water system generated by larger or separate water consumers, including the following: • California Polytechnic University—ADD=462 gpm • Airport Area Private Water—ADD= I 1 gpm The university has its own on-site storage reservoirs. Peak hourly fluctuations within the university would be provided by their own reservoirs. Therefore, maximum day demand factors were applied to the university demands,but peak hour factors were not. Peak hour demands were applied to the private Airport Area as it does not have its own storage reservoir. Existing water demand by pressure zone and the approximate population within each zone(based on water demand factor of 145 gpcpd and a total population of 44,000) is shown in Table 2-9. Fire flow requirements for cities are established by a variety of codes and regulations, including the Uniform Fire Code,Insurance Services Organization (ISO), and other fire protection standards. These codes take into consideration the building area,materials of construction, height; importance, overhead sprinklers, and exposure. The local fire protection agencies use these codes and regulations to establish requirements and sometimes goals for hydrant flows,pressure, and durations from a city water system. Fire flows and duration used in the model are listed in Table 2-10. The city's fire sprinkler ordinance affects required fire flow in certain areas. However, because not all buildings are sprinklered in a zone, FRS3540001/December 18,2001 2-12 /30V`E W J } Om 'a C as E (D 0MCe) Mco co tr CD w^ pQ N E 00 N tf) OMo N coW O1, cp N O Q Gopc pp oOC pp «_Q mN Nt0 M O om Q C O of d v m w � C c Q n' cc d O CO N Cj N M Nc M CO N m N C m N h m O O 'T CO W MA O W A d• M m O m �.. V p N m tO CO (A M Q O) Q o 0 Q O M. .m,. W a7 O LV 1� m p 0) Q N 41. O c m 01 C v p M p m c c N !C0 C. W c c N I.- m N �- GO c N Q �- M m Q coN 2 m x . m J O LL o O O. 0i N O N Q fCa O (D W Cc m 0 a) O O m LL.J 0 a0 O m h 0 m t0 O m m 0 .- m m In 10 M O m 0 momr� oomommoGommmQminomo c c ' w Ernornq? oGOGoc� rno> oornrnooc� r� o0) as 0 c 0 0 0 o 0 0 o c c o c o o o h o a N 0 C t m m D a d U 0 c ~ c m w O m c Q 0 O C 'o N O O Q7 a7 N. O - y O co C IV U1 C C Tn _ E Q� C C O Q C $ •p O O E ++ z 7 ;50 a) m O O O a 0 m N 0 = 0 t O 0 •V � C as O C '5 . N d' C C Q = L a3 aS �;, w O O vD 0 Z W 0 y E 0 m C M o .. o a s a�a. C 0 -0 0 0 3 c c a� C m L m o d ami z u m ego L m aUi 3 m m 3 0 m °� G � mUC9 = 5 � � � z Oaa � W � cnmm � > m I O s C! � x � 41 C a LL u L c c ooa ^ CSO v C=O n 0 OOD m � r� M In CD �n CMy 00 00 0 O SO E o 0 M 0 O I- M Cp M N G 0 01 M CC CO " N M 01 0 N 0 N M N a c0 m �— to m C p N `7 0 CA 0 O N. q O R � I, w N N O , 0) r~.. co U) CD U.) O CV .= Co .- U-) O O C C m O CL c N 3 = plcp ` Cco D C J E OND (O f� M 0 N � O M N QM co M. NCL r Of m •a 0 co � Q N N N O O to CD C m m V m co E c FCL E a O m W A p M cm a G m p J .m. tm Oi 00 r- W O co O M CA w4) CD CM QC N .�- O O N n N O N X N U) II � N � II E a 0 C y y N v = a) _ m m cCM - p p a c t0 - m co) 65 m cCL cc in a _ E ;� or 3 = v0 3 t o L L t t E �° ai B a o �a is ca o m o m cis A eo m m c o o A o o m IL w p 9 LL0:1¢ a x co = Cl) LL Q (nU ¢ H � a cl M l 1 CO h Cn O O .- N C7 4 ui 0 0 co m I LL i am � tTa U O t4 L 3 = CL we c0i � •c — o � 4) cc m mt m am m m • E c' o a> a rn d a � E c 2 �y c ti W o V `y 'C O L U l0 a7 m N •L C LL O L C a) c N •O 1L aI y 4) •c O m Im CL O 7 N O.0 N c r CL — �• c C � a cm � a) O O . O c > a) C O a L O a7 Q7 O O.V _ CO O. t6 F M a7 Q O m IC' CO N O co IT v m t0 IV co O Q r lh r- to N S A T O to M LO O 0 0 06 0 O O O O O O O - C O R m 'a L L U m ea L m O go R m O 32 Z N N CV N t'M N IT M V' M v N M C4 c.0 3 m0 o LL t- O IL 0 m J — LL L � y�y O C T+V N O 0 0 0 0 0 O 000 O co p` E O 00000 O 000 O 00 V CL t0 O 1n to O O O O O O O O O N v M V t'7 N tr) �. O _ LL U m = U E m n � D � m .o L m U. > U O m -iCL 3 CL c a) C N o 0Qico 7 N N 7 O C 7 N i CI vs d E a) m x0 O 10 O O c E' - c� O + + L U vJ g = J N O 3 7 O co m O to O m y .—moo J fA - U U J J O fn = m U. the unsprinklered fire flows were used to evaluate the system for deficiencies. Note for commerciaU o� industrial areas the goal is 4.500 gpm, but 3,000 gpm may be acceptable in certain areas as determine by the Fire Department. 2.5.3 Future Water Demand Projections for buildout water demand in the city are needed to identify improvements to the existing water system which will be required to meet the future demands. For this study, future water demand was estimated from anticipated land use development at build-out conditions, as provided by the City Community Development Department and the Airport Area Specific Plan project team, and the water demand factors determined from the analysis of historical water demand data. A baseline 1998 demand of 7,914 acre-feet per year(4,906 gpm ADD)was used. This was based on a population of 44,000 people plus service to Cal Poly and the county airport. The resulting future buildout water demand used in this study, based on land use classifications shown in the General Plan and the water use factors in Table 2-8, was 11,208 acre-feet(6,950 gpm ADD). This compares closely to the water demand of 9,958 acre-feet for a buildout population of 56,000 times 145 gpcpd plus demands from Cal Poly. Buildout water demands based on land use classifications for the various pressure zones are shown individually in Table 2-11. O FRS3540001/December 18,2001 2-16 /30�LE 1 W Om 1 C C p c (� _ O 0 'C m p M r O v N � R M Q m y E _ c+� 1� O C N a �p N p 0 ao p 0 C 0 to a N 00 a0 Iv N p (y CO N N N a.m m_ m m c Fo- : m G) O r . . • . an . C o Cf) coc . c m o IL m L p m mN E c w .2 �^.J E O M f- I, C9 N O p K1 N O NO m r N M p O O O N <D a0 N <O CO00 M y a C m N W O N O N p N cd N m C N m o cm o mL Ci m � � V m cm m +• . Wao > m d F- 0 ma Q m0 O m m mp 3 LIm W m c3 _ m o o t CD m ¢' m Cl) V N O N N tpp Q co M m N N N M X Q M �- O X N Ln 11 N C 1� E -O C toE C r. L m N 3 = m m of N m cm c m m m _ o a t� .. T 0 x o m — _ ' S $ — :Z m a c E oar EY U) m c m z .c = r m .c m m m X o m o m c m rn m ani m c o � W o m ami a w o � LL z ¢ a Co co x w LL w cou < a .= CV Nf to lG t-, CO O C NC7 R 0 r r M V 0 g co m N o g m X � a LL M. Section 3 Raw water Conveyance and Treatment Evaluation 3.1 General City staff participated in a water treatment plant audit on February 11, 1998, (with a follow-up meeting on April 15, 1998)at which time Boyle staff gathered information about the plant and participated in a process-by-process discussion. Attendees were: City Staff Boyle Staff Ken Earing Ernie Kartinen Bill Smullen Ron Abraham Gary Hughes Christine Ferrara Jerry Smith David Hayward-George Wayne Hetland Gary Henderson 3.2 Background/Existing Plant Operations The existing surface water treatment plant is located approximately one half mile north of Highway 1 along Stenner Creek Road. The facility normally utilizes surface water from Salinas Reservoir otherwise known as Santa Margarita Lake. The drinking water permit requires water from Salinas Reservoir to be treated with conventional filtration. The City also takes surface water from Whale Rock Reservoir. However,this is considered a backup supply and provides water during off peak operations when Salinas Reservoir has excessive turbidity problems following storm events,when the sedimentation basin at the plant is out of service,or to supplement supply when water demand exceeds treatment capacity for Salinas Reservoir(8 MGD). Water from Whale Rock may be treated by either conventional or direct filtration. Following is a process description for conventional and direct filtration treatment: Conventional filtration consists of: • Coagulation(addition of coagulants and flash/rapid mixing to destabilize particle charges) • Flocculation(gentle mixing of the water to cause small particles to agglomerate into larger particles that can be settled or filtered) • Sedimentation (settling particles as sludge residuals from the water) FRS3540001/December 18,2001 3-1 �Q�LE • Filtration (physical straining of the unsettled particles). Direct filtration is similar to conventional filtration and includes coagulation, flocculation and filtration. Direct filtration is different from conventional filtration in that the water goes directly from flocculation to filtration and precludes the sedimentation process. To date,the City has operated the plant ori two occasions in the direct filtration mode. The current Drinking Water Permit allows the City to treat up to 16 MGD maximum-8 MGD from the Whale Rock Reservoir with direct filtration and 8 MGD from the Salinas,Reservoir with conventional filtration. Table 3-1 indicates the water source capacity limitation for both surface water supplies. Table 3-1' Water Supply Salinas Reservoir storage capacity 23,843 acre-feet Whale Rock Reservoir storage capacity 40.662 acre-feet Salinas Reservoir/Whale Rock- safe annual yield 7,235 acre feet/ ear Salinas Pipeline hydraulic capacity 12.4 cfs 8.0 MGD Whale Rock conveyance conduit capacity 18.94 cfs 12.2 MGD O * Future expanded capacity of Salinas Reservoir when gates installed—41,791 acre-feet. Table 3-2 illustrates the matrix for treatment capacities utilizing Salinas and Whale Rock water supplies: Table 3-2 Treatment Capacity Source/Treatment Capacity Total Capacity Source Filtration Method MGD MGD Whale Rock only Direct* 12.2 12.2 Whale Rock Direct 8 16 and Salinas Conventional 8 Salinas only Conventional 8 8 *Water treated from Whale Rock can be treated with either conventional treatment or direct filtration bypassing the sedimentation basin. Normal operation includes treating surface water from Salinas Reservoir. This limits the rated capacity to 8 MGD because the raw water conduit and conventional treatment capacity are each limited to 8 MGD as shown in Tables 3-1 and 3-2. In order for the City to treat over 8 MGD,water must also be obtained from Whale Rock. However,the Whale Rock supply is only used when necessary during peak demand period or when Salinas Reservoir water quality is poor due to due to high turbidity during a heavy rainfall event. Also,the Whale Rock conduit limits the amount of water that can be delivered to Othe treatment plant to 12.2 MGD from Whale Rock Reservoir as indicated in Table 34. FRS3540001/December 18,2001 3-2 M®V« The Water Management Element of the General Plan should be referenced for water entitlements and safe yield capacities of the 2 raw water supplies for the Water Treatment Plant(Salinas Reservoir and Whale Rock Reservoir). The treatment plant is normally operated in off-peak mode during the months of May through October. During off-peak operation the plant is operated less than 18 hours per day from 6 p.m. until 12 noon. It does not operate during the peak energy period from noon until 6 p.m. in order to reduce energy costs. At some time in the future when demand increases the plant will need to be expanded to deliver summer water needs or the plant will need to operate through the on-peak periods. Water that is released to the Salinas pipeline by the County of San Luis Obispo takes about 90 minutes to reach the treatment plant by gravity flow. Therefore, the City must either utilize water stored in the forebay or wait until water reaches the plant during the next operating period from the booster station. Once the water is shut off at the booster station,the remaining water in the pipeline continues to flow to the treatment plant or to the raw water storage reservoir(forebay) until the pipe is empty. The treatment plant is typically supplied with water from the Salinas Reservoir and operated in the conventional filtration mode as follows(see Figure 3-1). Water is first routed to two parallel ozone chambers where it is oxidized and disinfected. The water then flows to rapid mixers where alum is added for coagulation and then on to flocculation basins to allow larger floc-particles to form for settling. Water from the flocculation basins is then combined in the flocculation basin outlet and delivered to the sedimentation basin where sludge is allowed to settle out of the water. Water flows from the sedimentation basin launder to the filter influent channel. The water is filtered through four dual media gravity filters. After filtration,the water is chlorinated and fluoride is added before the O treated water is stored in the clearwell for use in the City water distribution system. The filters are cleaned utilizing air/water backwash. Treated water is used for backwashing and is stored in two washwater storage tanks. The recovered washwater, which collects solids removed from the water by the filters, flows by gravity to two washwater reclamation basins. Water is then decanted from the basins and pumped to the washwater treatment system which consists of a packaged water treatment plant that incorporates laminar plate settlers. The treated washwater is then returned by gravity to the ozone basin influent to be treated with the incoming raw water. Sludge that is settled in the circular sedimentation basin is.removed by a.mechanical sweep,which pushes the sludge toward the center collector pipe. Settled sludge flows by gravity to one of the three sludge drying beds. Settled sludge from the washwater treatment system is also routed to the sludge drying beds. The drying beds are valved so that the operators can manually select which drying bed is on line to receive sludge. The other drying beds are isolated so that they can be dried: FRS3540001/December 18,2001 3-3 �O�LE 4 � I � 6 � W 9 8 ZN ' i Fwl ma --------- • ......... ................._ ,J T c r mmy O n m � -q m� Xr� D to z $. ZN I C .,M' °m �8 Z9 C � m W C3.3 Raw Water Conveyance— Salinas Reservoir The existing conveyance system includes the following as illustrated in Figure 3-2: • Salinas Reservoir(23,843 ac-ft capacity). Salinas would have a future expanded capacity of 41,791 ac-ft if gates are added at the dam. • Booster station at base of the dam is designed to boost water to the Santa Margarita pump station when water level in Salinas Reservoir is below 1,267 feet. The booster station has a capacity of 12:7 cfs(8.2 MGD). Water is delivered by gravity to Santa Margarita pump station when the water level in Salinas Reservoir is above 1,267 feet. • Santa Margarita pump station pumps water through a 24-inch diameter reinforced concrete pipe to the entrance portal of the Cuesta Tunnel. • 18-inch diameter steel pipe to City's turnout • 18-inch pipe to Sterner Creek Hydroelectric Plant • 24-inch to 30-inch gravity pipe to water treatment plant or forebay Current operation of the raw water conveyance system from Salinas Reservoir requires the City to contact the County by telephone to start and stop flow delivery from Salinas Reservoir. Operation of the Graw water conveyance system is dependent on the level in the Salinas Reservoir. Above 1,267 feet,flow is delivered by gravity; below 1,267 feet requires the booster pumps at the base of the dam to deliver water. The Santa Margarita Pump Station has a 3-MG regulating reservoir that is filled by gravity from the Salinas Reservoir for storage buffering/pump control as water is pumped through the Santa Margarita Pump Station. However,there isnot sufficient.storage for more than a few hours of treatment plant capacity. The gravity portion of the raw water conveyance system from the Santa Margarita pump station to the treatment plant includes no provisions to keep it full when the plant is shut down. Once flow from Salinas Reservoir is stopped,water continues to flow to the treatment plant until the line completely empties. Normal operation is to fill the forebay with this water. The stored water in the forebay is utilized so the water treatment plant can operate while the raw water conveyance system is being refilled from Salinas Reservoir. This system appears to work well, as water in the raw water conveyance line in excess of the forebay capacity overflows into Cal Poly's agricultural pond. The existing mechanism for water delivery from Salinas Reservoir to the treatment plant is for the plant operators to call the County by telephone to request water delivery. Telemetry upgrades could be implemented to include the capability of starting and stopping raw water delivery at the treatment plant. The upgrade should also include status notification to San Luis Obispo County. O FRS3540001/December 18,2001 3-5 f30'frLE u p g c� o m w TIT Cal �. OZm v V) > •ti 0 c -° P� Zc c Fn v 0 � 1 s m zD o cc w D D j 52z C w n O 9 rn rn m D � r O n m lu N M O O r rn gs t � c � N recovered from Salinas Reservoir could go to direct filtration, bypassing the sedimentation basin. Treatment of the recovered washwater is helpful to plant operation in that the recovered washwater does not require settling time in the reclamation basins before it is pumped to the washwater treatment process. (See Figure 3-2.) However,the hydraulic capacity of the gravity piping from the washwater treatment equipment to the plant influent is not large enough to accommodate recycled washwater return from the recovery basins at the desired flow rate if only one ozone basin is used during plant flows exceeding 10 MGD. This is because the water level in the ozone basin increases when it is operated at higher hydraulic flows. The higher water level in the ozone basin results in higher back pressure and reduced flow capacity for the recycled waterline from the washwater treatment facility. This is an operational problem and could impact plant performance particularly during periods that require frequent filter backwashes. The recovery basins may be full when a filter is in need of backwashing. Current practice is to control (lower)the maximum water surface elevation in the ozone contact chambers by operating both basins. This works well at plant flows up to 16 MGD, but would not if plant flow were to exceed 20 MGD (10 MGD per ozone basin). Deficiencies • Hydraulic limitation of the washwater reclamation piping from the filters prevents filter backwashing at the normal rate when discharging to Reclamation Basin No. 1 if it is over half full. • Increased water level in the ozone chambers at flows above 8 to 9 MGD when only one ozone chamber is utilized limits the rate recovered washwater can be returned from the washwater treatment system. Recommended Washwater Recovery System Improvements • The washwater inlet control structure should be heightened approximately 6 feet(10 feet above grade)to prevent overflowing the control structure as indicated in Figure 34. There will be no confined space entry requirements with this improvement. Improvements will consist of heightening the flow control box, adding a stairway and landing platform with handrailing and kick plates to access the top of the structure, and extending the sluice gate operator to facilitate control from the access landing. • Consider future relocation of the plate settler structure to a higher elevation so that water can return to the ozonation basins by gravity. This will allow accommodation of higher raw water flow demand to the ozone chambers. Modifications to raise the washwater treatment facility (plate settler) will increase the lift for the reclaimed washwater pumps. Therefore,these pumps should be evaluated to determine if their lift capacity is sufficient to lift to the washwater treatment facility. O ' FRS3540001/December 18,2001 3-16 g®�L� f L � D e 5d c ®r o -N - o� $ <. rN la no • K (D I r=m N C) ° ¢ T ZA a m '" _A f s z (I w O3.4 Raw Water Conveyance—Whale Rock Reservoir The water is supplied to the City,the California Men's Colony, Dairy Creek Golf Course, and California Polytechnic State University. Whale Rock Reservoir is the primary water supply for to the Cayucos water purveyors. The existing conveyance system to the City includes the following: • Whale stock Reservoir(40,662 ac-ft capacity) • Approximately 17.1 miles of 30-inch diameter mortar coated and mortar-lined steel pipe Pipeline has a design capacity of 18.9 cfs • Water is delivered to the City's water treatment plant via Pump Stations A and B. Each pump station has five pumps and is capable of varying flow rates with three constant speed and two with variable frequency drives. • Turnouts from the Whale Rock pipeline exist for water deliveries to Chorro Reservoir and water treatment plant(operated by the Califomia Men's Colony), California Polytechnic State University (for agricultural purposes), Cayucos Area Water Treatment Plant,Dairy Creek Golf Course, and the City's water treatment plant The branch that extends off the main pipeline prior to the City's water treatment plant forebay, is directed to the Chorro Reservoir. The Whale Rock Reservoir spillway crest elevation is at C11 approximately 216 feet, and the low level outlet for the reservoir is:at approximately 70 feet, as shown on Figure 3-2. Based on a 1957 agreement with the California Department of Fish and Game,the City must notify the Department whenever the reservoir may be drawn below the minimum pool elevation which is at approximate 100 feet in elevation above sea level. The Reservoir capacity is about 2,000 ac- ft at this minimum level. The Whale Rock pipeline's low and high points are 8 and 547.2 feet, respectively. A report"Whale Rock Pump Stations, Preliminary Design of Upgrade and Expansion"prepared by Leedshill-Herkenhoff,Inc. in 1989 indicates the conduit includes two pump stations, Pump Stations A and B which are at elevations of 44 and 181 feet, respectively,as shown in Figure 3-2. Recommendations for Capital Improvements Along Whale Rock Pipeline Previous earth movement and landsliding events have ruptured the Whale Rock Pipeline within the Morro Bay portion of the alignment requiring the need for realignment of a portion of the pipeline. Design of the realignment is currently under design. The March 1997"Whale Rock Transmission Main Vulnerability Assessment"prepared for the Whale Rock Commission by Fugro West,Inc. identified seven active or recently active landslides along the pipeline route. It also identified liquefaction potential in the vicinity as well as reaches of the pipeline exposed to scour damage at creek crossing. The report further characterized the seismic setting as "a seismically active region of California,where relatively strong earthquakes have occurred in the past and are likely to occur again in the future." We conclude from this that the Whale Rock Pipeline is vulnerable to rupture due to earth movement, scour, and seismic activity. FRs3540001rDecember 1a,2001 3-7 t304�LE o Therefore, we recommend that the City and the Whale Rock Commission consider addressing the more vulnerable portions of the pipeline (the Panay and Nevis Landslides)to protect the reliability of the Whale Rock Pipeline. 3.5 Forebay/Headworks Raw water can be delivered directly from Salinas and Whale Rock Reservoirs to the treatment plant ozonation facilities via the existing raw water piping. Alternatively,raw water can be routed from either source to the 750,000 gallon forebay. Normal operations include filling the forebay from the Salinas Reservoir before the treatment plant is shut down. The water stored in the forebay provides flexibility to restart the water treatment plant while the Salinas pipeline is being filled. Control of the water storage in the forebay is currently accomplished manually. In the event that the forebay is full when the treatment plant is shut down,the City operationally does not stop flow in the Salinas pipeline. Therefore,water remaining in the pipeline continues to drain into the forebay and overflows to Cal Poly's agricultural ponds. However, future operations at Cal Poly may utilize the ponds fora water reuse project thereby impacting the ability to overflow to the ponds. The forebay expansion joints around the perimeter are in need of repair from weather and-squirrel damage. There is no fence around the forebay to provide security or keep animals out. Also,the side walls of the reservoir are very steep,which makes it difficult for an animal to escape once it has fallen into the reservoir. According to staff, a deer entered the reservoir and drowned in 1997 as it was unable._ to climb back out. It is important to provide source water protection of surface water,including open raw water reservoirs, from such potential contamination risks. Deficiencies • Inadequate security and protection from contamination. (The City has corrected this problem by installing a perimeter fence around the forebay.) • Expansion joints are deteriorated. • Forebay does not have level indication. • Existing access ladder is dilapidated and in need of replacement. Recommended Forebay Improvements • Install a security fence with gates around the forebay to preclude unauthorized access or animals from entering the open forebay reservoir(City has installed perimeter fence). • Repair the expansion joints to limit potential leakage from the reservoir. • Provide a new ladder to improve egress from the forebay. FRS3540001/December 18,2001 3-8 /304oLE • Provide forebay level monitoring for coordination of plant shut downs and controlling overflow to Cal Poly's agricultural ponds.. 3.6 Ozonation/Primary Disinfection Primary disinfection contact CT is provided by pretreatment ozonation. The facilities include two parallel ozone contact basins, each of which includes four chambers. Ozone is added to the first two chambers. Tracer studies indicate the facility achieves CT compliance. Table 3-3 indicates the removal and inactivation for giardia and viruses for the treatment plant: Table 3-3 CT Requirements Removal/Inactivation Logs Reg aired Removal L s Credited Inactivation Logs Required Giardia Viruses Giardia Viruses Giardia Viruses Conventional 3.0 4.0 2.5 2.0 0:5 2.0 Filtration Direct 3.0 4.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 Filtration • The performance of CT flow characteristics has been optimized(closest to plug flow)at 16 MGD. The City has been able to optimize CT compliance utilizing the multiple sampling locations to calculate CT in the ozone contact chambers. The ozone facility requires a cooling water supply up to 400 gpm. The California Department of Health Services(DHS)requires that this water be filtered before returning it to the treated water clearwell. The water is returned to the filter influent from the ozone generator cooling system which adds a - considerable hydraulic loading to the filters, approximately 3.5 percent of the filter design flow. Deficiencies • Potential contamination of filters with oil from leaky cooling system seals. Oil, if leaked, could clog the filter media and negatively impact plant operations. • Additional hydraulic loading to the filters, up to 400 gpm from the ozone cooling system. Recommended Ozonation Improvements • Provide flow meter or some other means to verify flow rate and impact from this system onto hydraulic filter loading. • Consider modification to the ozone cooling system to incorporate a closed loop system with a cooling tower once capacity demand increases sufficiently to require increased filter capacity. MS35440001/December 18,2001 3-9 g®YL� O This improvement would eliminate the cooling water flow and hydraulic loading to the filters. It O would also eliminate the potential of an oil leak that could contaminate the filters. The system should include blowdown and makeup water provisions. The hydraulic loading to the filters would be reduced by 3.5 percent of the rated capacity. This corresponds to an additional hydraulic flow to the filters of as much as 432,000 gallons for a typical 18-hour operating day-approximately the quantity of backwash water used each day to backwash four filters,480,000 gallons. Blowdown water is periodically discharged from the cooling tower to reduce total dissolved solids, which concentrate due to evaporation, should be discharged to the sludge (residuals) drying beds. A small quantity of makeup supply for the cooling system would be needed to offset evaporation and blowdown. However,this would be substantially less than the current flow which is estimated at 400 gpm utilized for cooling the ozone system. 3.7 Conventional Filtration/Direct Filtration Processes Following is a discussion of the unit processes that make up the conventional and direct filtration processes. The conventional filtration process includes coagulation, flocculation, sedimentation, and filtration. Direct filtration omits the sedimentation step. 3.7.1 Coagulation Coagulation is accomplished with axial flow,vertical turbine flash mixer following each ozone train. The mixers incorporate Chemineer spiral helical gear drives,which appear to be in good working order and provide sufficient energy gradient (flash mixer- 1000 sec 1, rapid mixer-400 sec-1) to accomplish rapid/flash mixing. Alum is injected to the rapid/flash mixer as the primary coagulant. In addition, there is capability to add polymers to aid coagulation and flocculation. Deficiencies • There are no observable deficiencies with the coagulation process. 3.7.2 Flocculation The flocculation system includes three-stage baffled flocculation chambers which use tapered energy mixing. Staff indicated the variable frequency drives on the vertical turbine mixers are a maintenance problem, and they would like to see across-the-line starting capability to bypass the starters. The detention times in the flocculation basins at 16 MGD is 24 minutes. This is sufficient for flocculation of surface water. Deficiencies • Reportedly there are control problems with variable frequency drives. O FRS3540001/December 18,2001 3-10 f30i�LE i ORecommended Flocculation Improvements • Continue practice of modifying VFDs. 3.7.3 Sedimentation Basins There is only one sedimentation basin which is rated at 8 MGD. However,the City indicated that the sedimentation basin has been operated up to I 1 MGD. A further evaluation may be necessary to determine maximum rating for the sedimentation basin. The maximum surface loading should not exceed 900 gpm/sq. ft. for algae/turbidity removal. Note,Salinas Pipeline is also limited to 8 MGD capacity. Therefore,the plant's capacity is limited to 8 MGD(the capacity of the sedimentation basin) if only Salinas Reservoir water is being treated. Since Salinas is a primary water source,addition of a second sedimentation basin and associated piping will provide process reliability if the sedimentation basin has to taken out of service for maintenance or repair. Also, future surface water supplies such as Nacimiento Reservoir would probably require conventional treatment including sedimentation which would exceed the current capacity: The addition of ozonation has increased the amount of algae growth within the treatment plant processes,particularly in the sedimentation basin and filter chamber walls above the waterline during summer months. This is not uncommon since the ozone oxidizes organics into smaller more assimilable nutrients for algae,thereby encouraging algae growth. Deficiencies • Single sedimentation basin limits conventional treatment capacity to 8 MGD. Future demand increase using other surface water sources cannot be met. • The sedimentation basin cannot be taken off line for servicing or repairs and continue to provide conventional treatment capability. • Algae builds up on the sedimentation basin weir and launder during summer. Recommended Conventional Treatment Improvements • Consider modifying the existing sedimentation basin clarifier drive to facilitate addition of a brush system on the sedimentation basin mechanism to clean the launders on the overflow weir. This will require modification to support the bridge and access stairs from the exterior wall instead of the weir wall,thus allowing the brush to clean the weir,walls,and launder floor as the sludge mechanism moves around the sedimentation basin. This brush system would be blocked by the existing bridge support on the weir. • Add a second sedimentation basin to provide conventional filtration capability for Salinas Reservoir and future surface water supplies. Addition of a second sedimentation basin will also provide the flexibility to service one unit and maintain conventional treatment. FRS3540001/December 18,2001 3-11 MOVLE C; Based on our site visit, it appears that the most appropriate location for a second sedimentation basin is northeast of and adjacent to the existing sedimentation basin. This appears to be the onl practical location on the treatment plant site. Alternate sites would be a considerable distance from the existing sedimentation basin and would require substantial piping and probably a pump station to lift the water back up to the filters. Addition of a new sedimentation basin at the suggested location will require earth fill upon which to build the new unit at the same hydraulic grade line as the existing sedimentation basin. This is necessary to continue providing gravity flow to the filters. 3.7.4 Filtration The existing filters have been upgraded with the installation of new underdrain systems and media. They have also been modified to incorporate air scour backwashing. There are four dual media filter units, each with 700 square feet of surface area. This corresponds to a filtration rate of 3.97 gpm/sf at the 16-MGD maximum permitted production rate with all filters in operation. Normal operations include maintaining constant plant flow rate during backwash cycles. This corresponds to an increased filtration rate of 5.29 gpm/sf for the other three filters at a plant flow rate of 16 MGD. DHS currently allows 6.0 gpm/sf for gravity filtration rates. However, DHS prefers limiting rapid changes in filtration rates during operation, as there is an increased potential to disrupt the filters and cause shorter filter runs or passage of solids through the filters. The filters do not include filter-to-waste piping which would allow filtered water that does not meet the,� turbidity requirements to be diverted to the backwash recovery system. However,there are provisions t6 add polymer to the washwater during backwash cycles to condition the filters for placing them back on line to minimize turbidity spiking during the initial portion of filter runs. There are also controls to adjust how fast the filters are brought back up to normal operation(3.97 gpm/sf) following backwashing to minimize filter breakthrough and upset. During our site visit,we observed one of the filter backwash cycles. It was evident that the backwash system performs very well. It was also very easy to determine when the filters were clean and the filter backwash discontinued. This is very important since the washwater reclamation system has'a limited capacity to store and handle recovered washwater. It is also important to optimize the washwater quantity as it is recycled to the front of the plant following retreatment. This increases the hydraulic load on the plant by approximately 4.5 percent. We noticed that a.substantial amount of air was trapped in the media or underdrain system at the end of the air scour cycle. However, it appeared that most of the air was purged at the beginning of the backwash cycle before the water level reached the washwater launders. Therefore,the trapped air observed does not appear to cause significant media loss. Normal practice is to initiate filter backwashing manually. Current practice is to clean the exposed filter walls manually with high-pressure hoses during each backwash cycle. This is a good practice, which allows the operator to closely observe backwashing performance and helps reduce algae growth in the filters without using chemicals. Typically, each of the City's four filters is backwashed about every two days(48 hours). This is normally accomplished by backwashing two filters one day and the other two filters the following day, with the cycle starting over FRS3540001/December 18,2001 3-12 MOVLE i Cagain on the third day,and so on. This allows only two filters to be backwashed on any given day and )reduces the loading to the backwash recovery and recycle treatment system. If all four filters were to be backwashed in one day,the loading to the recovery system would be doubled. In 1994 the City implemented ozone for primary disinfection in place of chlorine to comply with DBP Rule requirements to control THM formation. Prior to addition of ozone,the City had experienced THM levels between 80 and 100 gg/L. The City was able to meet the THM standard that was in place at that time(100 gg/L). However,these THM levels(prior to 1994 implementation of ozone disinfection) would have exceeded the new standard which was later implemented in November 1998 (80 gg/L). Since addition of ozone for disinfection , all THM quarterly running averages have been well below the current standard of 80 gg/L. In fact most THM levels have been between 40 and 50 gg/L. It does not appear that any measures need to be implemented at this time to meet current DBP regulations. However,EPA may at some time in the future implement the Stage 2 DBP Rule modifications which could limit THM and HAAS formation to as low as 40 and 30 gg/L, respectively. Based on current THM concentrations 40 to 50 gg/L, the City may have to revisit measures when and if the limits are lowered,to reduce THM production in the water. One option to reduce THM potential is to remove precursors by removing some of the TOC from the water before it is chlorinated. This could be accomplished utilizing granular activated carbon(GAC) for filtration,media in the existing filter chambers. Another option would be to eliminate the use of free chlorine for secondary disinfection and switch to chloramines which do not form DBPs. However, a cost analysis should be conducted to compare the cost of GAC and chloramines with other viable solutions, as the GAC is fairly expensive and will require periodic media replacement or regeneration. Recommended Filtration Improvements • Consider modifying controls to maintain constant filtration rates through individual filters during backwash cycles. This can be accomplished by controlling the plant influent raw water flow rate during filter backwashes and maintaining constant flow through the on-line filters. The plant. influent is typically controlled in this way by maintaining a constant level in the filter inlet channel. Typically, each filter is backwashed every 36-48 hours of use and off-line for a total of about 30 minutes. With a constant filtration rate maintained for the on-line filters,the plant treated water production would be reduced by 330,000 gpd(15.67 MGD at the 3.97 gpm/sf filtration rate). Operating the plant at a slightly increased filtration rate of 4.05 gpm/sf the plant could yield 16 MGD of treated water without increasing on line filter loading rate(gpm/sf)during backwashing. • Consider future implementation of GAC filter media to reduce THMs in the treated water. 3.7.5 Washwater Storage Tanks �I There are two washwater tanks,each with a capacity of about 180,000 gallons. During our site visit, we �J observed that Washwater Tank No. 1,which was constructed in 1964, does not include tank tie downs to FRS3540001/December 18.2001 3-13 g�Yl� the ring wall as does Tank No. 2 which was constructed in 1994. We also noticed Tank No. 1 has a rigid inlet/outlet that enters the bottom of the tank and might be subject to shearing off or rupturing during an earthquake. Deficiencies • There is a question as to Washwater Tank No. 1's ability to withstand an earthquake. Recommended Washwater Tank Evaluation • Consider performing seismic analysis for existing Washwater Tank No. 1. Washwater Tank No. 1 is located above the rest of the treatment plant where it could cause flooding problems in the event of tank failure. Loss of this tank would also limit washwater storage capacity. Therefore, a seismic evaluation of the tank is recommended. Outcome of the evaluation may indicate seismic retrofitting and/or operational modifications to operate the reservoir at a lower water level than at present. The reduced tank level provides greater distance from the water surface to the roof for sloshing and reduces the probability of tank failure. The evaluation may also provide recommendations to modify the tank piping to include an aboveground inlet/outlet pipe in place of the buried one. 3.7.6 Washwater Recover Facilities The existing washwater reclamation facilities include two concrete lined wastewater reclamation basins. Each has a volume sufficient to hold 250,000 gallons of water, which is slightly more than normal or two(105,000 gallons)backwashes, as indicated by staff. Our calculations and the "Technical Report for Operating Permit"prepared by Black&Veatch concur that this is sufficient storage for four filter backwashes. Washwater Reclamation Basin No. 2 reportedly operates well and does not have any hydraulic limitations. However, Washwater Reclamation Basin No. 1 is several feet higher and overflows the inlet structure during normal backwash rate when there is over 120,000 gallons in Basin No. 2. (See Figure 3-3.) Selection of which basin receives washwater is accomplished manually by opening or closing the inlet control gates. The operators must check to confirm the desired recovery basin inlet is open and the other valve closed before initiating a backwash. Otherwise, it is possible to overflow a full recovery basin. The elevation of Washwater Reclamation Basin No. 1 requires filter backwashing to be accomplished at a reduced rate to prevent flooding when Basin No. 1 is over half full. This hydraulic limitation reduces the effectiveness of cleaning the filters. Reduced backwash rate is described as one of the leading causes for filter fouling as described in the March 1998 Opfloly published by American Water Works Association. Both washwater reclamation basins have flat bottoms and access ramps,which allow access for manual cleaning. Current operation includes cleaning the basins about 3 to 4 times a year. DHS requires the recovered washwater to be treated prior to returning to the plant influent. This is because the washwater FRS3540001/December 18,2001 3-14 f30YL� i , 3 � CA U% dig Cb S 3$ 1 m 1 ( m IC a Sd z f � t _ o A 2 O 5 N Z � Z ` s � � m 1 � D C fe so _ 00 0 S`TG Ea f ; Mrrl c N C • lD . C ' o o o � f m z s ' a� C T � � m � 3.8 Distribution System Residual (Secondary) Disinfection Distribution system residual disinfection is provided using liquid sodium hypochlorite injected into the filtered waterline before it flows into the clearwell. The water flows from the filters (elevation 430±)to the clearwell(bottom elevation 412+). The City incorporated air relief vents on the discharge side of the filter rate of flow controllers to prevent air binding. This apparently works satisfactorily. The combined filter chlorine residual sample is located in the filtered waterline about ten feet from the clearwell. The previously described filtered water disinfection improvements and the addition of a new treated water storage reservoir(see treated water storage facilities)will provide additional disinfection contact time for emergency disinfection utilizing liquid sodium hypochlorite as backup disinfection for ozone. The treated water storage can also be used to provide CT compliance to supplement ozone contact time, particularly at higher flows which push the ozone disinfection to the limit. These improvements,when implemented, should be included in the Emergency Disinfection Plan required by DHS. This is important as DHS considers the plant as the first water consumer. Deficiencies • Some chlorine may be lost due to cascading in the combined filter waterline when the clearwell is low. However,this is not significant and will not require modifications. Recommended Secondary Disinfection System Improvements J • Perform tracer study of the clearwell to evaluate emergency disinfection capabilities using liquid sodium hypochlorite for CT compliance. 3.9 Clearwell Storage Facilities The existing clearwell is a 4-MG aboveground steel tank. The tank was constructed in 1962 before current seismic design standards were implemented. The clearwell is not anchored to a ring wall or foundation. Also,the tank inlet comes from the bottom,through the tank floor and could potentially be sheared off,flooding the tank foundation during an earthquake. The.tank has been inspected by divers and is in need of recoating. However,there is no second clearwell to provide treated water storage capability while taking the existing clearwell out of service for recoating. The reservoir is not currently used for achieving disinfection CT compliance; primary disinfection is met with the ozone facilities. However, emergency disinfection with hypochlorite could require treated water storage time in the clearwell to achieve CT. Hypochlorite could be injected at the 03 basin,with consequent CT travel time through the entire process and the clearwell. Staff indicated that the capacity of the clearwell and distribution system treated water storage, and limited pumping capacity at the transfer pump station, limit the water treatment plant's ability to meet peak water demand. The limited storage impacts the ability to operate the treatment plant in the off- peak hours of the day during the summer(6 p.m. to noon the next day)and meet system demand. This Cis because the greatest demand occurs from noon to 6 p.m.,when the City desires to have the treatment plant shutdown to reduce operating costs. FRS3540001/December 18,2001 3-18 �A�L� C Deficiencies i • Limited storage and pumping capacity of both on-site facilities and within the distribution system make it difficult to take the clearwell out of service for maintenance or repair. • Maximum water demand occurs during the hours when the plant is shut down. This schedule is followed from noon until 6:00 p.m. for the months of May through October to realize off-peak. power savings. The limited storage and non-operation of the plant during this peak demand period is not a problem with current water needs. However,this limitation will impede the ability of the existing facilities to meet peak summer and future year around demand: Not operating the plant during the peak demand also increases the time-of-day storage(total treated water storage volume)needed. • Inadequate treated water storage capacity at the treatment plant and in the distribution system limits operational flexibility of treatment plant and overall water system. This problem will worsen with increased water demand. • The treatment plant cannot easily continue operation with the clearwell out of service. • There is a question as to the ability of treated water storage tank to withstand an earthquake. Therefore we recommend a seismic analysis to verify reliability of the existing clearwell. • Staff indicated the existing clearwell has never been taken off-line because there is no backup. For this reason, staff is unable to make repairs within the tank. J Recommended Treated Water Storage improvements • A second 4-MG clearwell is recommended for the following reasons: Provide reliable emergency disinfection CT Emergency primary disinfection could be provided to meathe required 0:5 logs of giardia and 2.0 logs of virus inactivation when the ozone system is off-line by using the hypochlorite feed system and the recommended clearwells to provide CT storage. This would be possible if each tank is at least half full when both are on line or one tank is full while the other tank is off-line for service or repair. The ratio of CTS/CTPAd d would be 1.05 under the following conditions: — Disinfectant is free chlorine using sodium.hypochlorite — Plant flow 16 MGD — 8-MG total clearwell storage capacity — 4-MG of treated water in clearwells — Tlo/T=0.1 =:> CT volume 0.4 MG — Minimum water temperature of 5°C — Maximum pH of 8.0 — Chlorine dosage 1.0 mg/L — CT=36 FRS3540001/December 18,2001 3-19 gO�I�LE O — AWWA recommends providing multiple units for process reliability and redundancy (reference Water Treatment Plant Third Edition, Chapter 22, Design Reliability Features). Clearwell storage capacity is needed for providing disinfection CT storage under the emergency disinfection requirements. Current need is for at least 3 MG storage and 4 MG for future demand. This cannot be provided unless a second 4 MG tank is provided. — Provide additional treated water storage capacity. Currently,the City's highest water demand occurs when the treatment plant is shut down from noon to 6 p.m. each day during summer months. This places a burden on the treatment plant to produce water during the remaining 18 hours each day. Assuming a maximum current day demand of about 12 MGD and a future maximum day demand of 16 MGD with peak demand factor of two times the maximum day demand during the afternoon when the plant is shut down,approximately 6 to 8 MG of storage will be needed to supply the water for the shutdown period. This will require the distribution system to store the amount of water needed during the high demand period of the day. This additional storage could be provided with an additional clearwell or a storage tank somewhere in the distribution system. Refer to Section 4 for specific storage recommendations. Additional study and modeling of the system would be needed to determine feasibility and seasonal operation for energy savings based on varying demands. Clearwell storage could be phased in 2-MG increments,for a total future capacity of 4 MG. However,the incremental cost of a 4-MG tanks is significantly lower that for a smaller 2-MG C' tank. The differential in cost would be about 20 to 25 percent higher for each gallon of storage capacity for a smaller reservoir. Addition of a 2-MG incremental clearwell could be constructed at any time during the year. The tank should be constructed prior to taking the existing clearwell off-line for repairs and cleaning. If a smaller clearwell is added,the existing 4-MG reservoir should be taken off line only for repairs, except during a low demand period, so that water delivery can meet demand. If a power failure or loss of the ozone feed system occurs while the 4 MG reservoir is offline during a peak demand period,the 2 MG incremental reservoir would provide the only clearwell capacity available for disinfection contact. This could limit the plant capacity to 8 MGD. While not required for system design storage, it does provide additional treated water storage at the treatment plant. It will also reduce pumping requirements to Reservoir No. 2 hydraulic grade by providing more storage at lower elevation where the capacity is most needed. — Additional storage capacity would allow the treatment plant to continue operation to the capacity of the expanded storage facilities during a power failure at the plant. This provides increased ability to maintain a reliable water supply even when there is a power failure or other emergency. Continued plant operation would be contingent upon continued power supply to the raw water conveyance system during a power failure at the plant. O FRS3540001/December 18,2001 3-20 g®�L� C It is good engineering practice to incorporate multiple clearwells sized to facilitate flexible water treatment plant and distribution system operations. Typically these tanks are the same size. Ten States Standards for Water Works Facilities recommends that there are a minimum of at least two clearwell facilities. The clearwell storage capacity should be sized in conjunction with distribution storage to relieve filters from having to follow fluctuations in water use. The City has had to shut down the filters and treatment plant in the past because the clearwell becomes full and there is no place to put the water. Piping for the second clearwell should be plumbed with the ability to route water through both reservoirs in series, in parallel,or through either reservoir bypassing the other. This will allow each reservoir to be taken out of service for inspection and maintenance. It will also provide the ability to increase disinfection contact time when both reservoirs are on line. It appears the only place with sufficient area to locate a new reservoir is to the east of the existing sludge basins. It also appears that the elevation of the new tank can match the existing to provide for gravity flow from the filters. However, this needs to be confirmed along with any subsurface conflicts. • The clearwell is coated steel and has been in service since it was constructed in 1962. Based on our experience with similar tanks, some interior recoating is probably needed. The City has inspected the existing clearwell and has found that recoating and repairs are necessary. Once the new clearwell is constructed and operational, the existing clearwell should be taken off line for repairs and recoating. • Perform seismic analysis for existing clearwell. Since the clearwell was constructed in 1962 and the treatment plant is the city's primary water supply, it appears prudent to evaluate the existing tank's ability to withstand a seismic event. Outcome of the evaluation may indicate seismic retrofitting and/or operational modifications to operate the reservoir at less than full tank to withstand expected seismic events. Outcome of the seismic evaluation should be considered in sizing the new reservoir to provide the needed storage capacity as the evaluation may reduce the recommended water volume stored in the existing clearwell. 3.10 Residuals Removal/Handling The existing sludge (residual)drying beds include three separate units—Basin Nos. 1, 2, and 3. These facilities are sand bottom basins with underdrain facilities. The beds include a total of about 0.75 acre of total drying area. The drying beds appear to drain effectively as only one pond was in use. The other two were cleaned out and dry during our site visit. Typically, it takes about 8 months to fill one drying bed with sludge. Once filled,the full drying bed is allowed to dry for a couple of months before it is cleaned out while one of the other drying beds is utilized to receive sludge. Drying bed underdrains convey water from the sludge drying beds to the Cal Poly storage facility's ponds. FRS3540001/Deoember 18,2001 3-21 f30+�LE ,,—�1Future modification to incorporate enhanced coagulation may increase the amount of sludge generated at the plant,depending on the additional amount of coagulant needed to reduce total organic carbon (TOC). Deficiencies • None with current operation. However, modifications to incorporate enhanced coagulation may increase the amount of sludge generated for the entire water treatment plant. Recommended Residuals Removal/Handling Improvements • None for present operation. Existing facilities appear to be sufficient for current flow. • Consider future modifications to include one additional drying bed to increase drying capacity if enhanced coagulation is required. While sufficient space appears to be available coordination with other facilities in the area will be required. 3.11 Plant Pumping Facilities The plant pumps supply water to the washwater storage tanks and plant service water. These old pumps require a substantial amount of maintenance and it is difficult to obtain replacement parts. Also,the Cmotors for these pumps are open and subject to cool moist air,which they were not intended to tolerate, resulting in frequent failures and increased.maintenance requirements.. There is also a fire suppression PUMP. Deficiencies • Pump reliability is questionable. • Pumps require substantial maintenance and difficult-to-obtain replacement parts. • The pumps at the plant pump station have open motors that are not enclosed and are exposed to moisture. Recommended Pumping Facility Improvements • Replace old pumps. • Replace open drip-proof motors on the pumps with high-efficiency motors which are enclosed and fan cooled for motors that have not yet been replaced. • Consider a study to further evaluate modifications which would interconnect the plant water piping to Reservoir No. 2 piping that is routed along the Stenner Creek Road,which fronts the C treatment plant. This study would need to evaluate the adequacy to deliver sufficient water at the desired pressure for operation of water systems and the fire sprinkler within the plant. If further FRs3540001/December 1e,2001 3-22 I3®4'LE C� study indicates,this would provide supplemental plant water and fire protection for the treatmen plant. It would also provide backup for the existing plant water pumps. The existing standby power facility could likely be dedicated to emergency plant operation as power requirements would be reduced. 3.12 Chemical Feed and Storage Chemicals utilized at the treatment plant and their objectives are include: • Alum(50% solution)—primary coagulant • Cationic polymer(liquid)—coagulant aid • Anionic or nonionic polymer(liquid)—filter aid • Ozone (on site generated gas)—primary disinfectant and flocculent aid • Sodium hypochlorite(12.5-15 % solution)—maintenance and distribution system disinfectant • Sodium silicofluoride(dry)—water fluoridation • Sodium hydroxide(25% solution)—pH adjustment Hypochlorite is received at a concentration of 12.5 to 15 percent. Generally,hypochlorite at higher concentrations exhibits more rapid decay rate than a concentration of 10 percent. The rate of decay is subject to quality control at the place of manufacture and the amount of iron in the water used for the hypochlorite solution. Decay also depends on ambient storage temperature. Higher temperatures accelerate the rate of decay. The degree of decay affects the quantity of hypochlorite that must be fed to achieve a desired residual. The existing black storage tanks tend to absorb more solar heat than lighter color tanks,thus potentially increasing temperature decay that results during hot weather. It also can contribute to chlorine gas buildup in chemical feed lines resulting in gas binding the metering pumps and rupture of plastic chemical feed piping. It is also more difficult to provide reliable flow proportional feed rate if the actual concentration of chlorine fed is something lower than the anticipated concentration. The fluoride feed system exhibited problems with clogging and settling of the chemicals in the chemical feed lines and mix tank until magnets were placed on the water supply line. Apparently,the fluoride system now works satisfactorily, and there is no observable buildup . Subsequent to our February 11, 1998 site visit, staff modified the fluoride feed system to reduce fluoride dust leaking. Fluoride dust is harmful to breathe and corrosive to metallic equipment. Recommended Chemical Feed Facility Improvements • Consider utilizing a hypochlorite feed system to provide disinfection when the facility is operating on standby power to save energy and minimize standby power requirements during emergency operation. • Consider coating the existing black hypochlorite storage tanks with a white paint system to reduce temperature-induced decay. It would also be acceptable to place a white insulation material around the tank to accomplish this. The insulation should be securely fastened to keep it place and prevent the wind from blowing it from the tank. MS3540001/December 18,2001 3-23 IC30+frLE 03.13 Standby Power/Reliability The existing standby power has the capacity to operate the following facilities, some of which are not currently connected to the emergency generator. It is believed that the following electrical loads can be served by the emergency generator: • Emergency lighting • Fire pump • Plant control system • On-line water quality analyzers including turbidity and chlorine residual • Plant water system including water pump for fire protection • Control of plant influent valves • Chemical feed systems, alum and sodium hypochlorite(needs transfer switch) • Staff needs to verify which facilities are connected Standby power,which would be needed to keep the plant operating during a power failure, could possibly be provided utilizing the existing 200-kW standby power unit. This is provided that 1) fire flows are obtained from Reservoir No. 2 (i.e.fire pump is disconnected from standby generator set and removed) and 2) storage capacity and primary disinfection is supplied utilizing the hypochlorite feed system during a power failure. These changes would substantially reduce the power required to keep the plant operational. ODeficiencies • Inability of the plant(the City's primary water source)to remain operational during a power failure. • The plant would not be required to shut down if power was lost for the raw water conveyance system since Whale Rock has auxiliary power to supply 3.2 MGD. Recommended Standby Power/Reliability Improvements • Consider transfer switches and rewiring to provide emergency standby power capacity to operate the water treatment plant during a power failure. • Other recommended improvements include emergency plant operation utilizing hypochlorite for disinfection and Reservoir No. 2 to provide fire protection rather than pumping water from the clearwell. • Further investigation for precise power requirements should be conducted to verify the existing generator has sufficient capacity to operate the treatment plant if these changes are made. 0 FRS3540001/December 18,2001 3-24 MOVLE 3.14 Other Plant Reliability Concems The treatment plant is a critical facility providing the City's primary drinking water supply and, as such, the proximity of the railroad tracks(which run parallel to and above the treatment plant's northern boundary)present the possibility of damage associated with derailment. Risk • While an extremely low risk potential, the possibility that a train derailment could take the plant out of service for an extended period. It is possible that tipped rail road cars could dump materials into the treatment plant, contaminating the water. Such an event could possibly prevent the treatment plant from delivering water while repairs are made. Recommended Improvements • The City may want to consider measures to protect the water treatment plant from a potential train derailment. These improvements should be either a retaining wall or a berm sized to prevent a train from rolling down onto the treatment facilities or from leaking materials that could contaminate the water. However, further investigation needs to be accomplished to determine the most cost-effective solution, including determination of whether or not there is adequate space for addition of protective facilities. 3.15 Intermittent Operation for-Off Peak Power Cost Savings Versus Continuous (24 Hour) Operation In the future, water demand will exceed the facility's ability to meet the water demand if the plant continues to be operated less than 18 hours a day between May and November. A cost analysis is anticipated to show that physical expansion of the facility to continue meeting demand with 18-hour- per-day operation (off-peak energy costs)will not be cost beneficial. The alternative is to operate the plant 24 hours a day. Further, in light of upcoming energy deregulation,which will encourage competition among utility companies,power cost savings currently realized from off--peak operation may be reduced or eliminated. Also,continuous operation is encouraged by DHS,as it provides improved performance with less potential for a water treatment plant upset that is associated with starting and stopping a treatment plant,particularly the filters. Another option to consider would be to provide diesel or natural gas generators to power the plant. These could be used to provide both emergency power during a utility company outage and to operate the plant during on-peak utility company periods. This option should be checked with the Air Pollution Control District to confirm permitting requirements. Recommended Improvements • Consider performing a cost analysis to compare benefits of off-peak operation with continuous 24-hour operation, particularly as demand increases. Items in the cost evaluation should include capital improvements of treatment plant and water storage facilities, energy costs, staffing, and operation and maintenance. FRS35400010ecember 18,2061 3-25 �30�LE C3.16 Buildout Plant Capacity Currently the plant has a permitted capacity of 16 MGD and the full buildout maximum day demand is estimated at about 16.0 MGD based on evaluation of projected future growth in the city. Consequently, expansion of the plant capacity is unnecessary. The treatment plant has the theoretical capacity to treat up to 20 MGD based on calculations, hydraulics and process loading for the existing treatment facilities. However; in order to provide 20 MGD,the treatment plant must operate at an increased filtration rate continuously,24 hours per day,to handle recovered washwater that is returned to the plant influent along with the incoming raw water flow. 3.16.1 Ozone Disinfection Basins The existing ozone basins have a rated capacity of 20 MGD and provide a contact time of 11.4 minutes at the full buildout maximum day demand of 16 MGD. For information purposes,to provide 20 MGD treated water delivery,the ozone and other facilities would need to be operated at a hydraulic loading of 21.05 MGD. This is to account for the 210,000 gallons per day that are used for backwash supply. A contact time of 8.66 minutes would be provided as compared to the current contact time of 11.4 minutes at 16 MGD. The reduced contact time would require an increased dosage to achieve the same CT. If the higher capacity is desired,a follow-up tracer study should be conducted to verify the contact time at the higher flow. The feed system is sized for 750 lb/day(design feed rate of 3.0 mg/L and maximum feed rate of 4.0 mg/L at 16 MGD). Note that feeders are sized to provide 5.6 mg/L for 16 MGD flow Obased on the 7501b/day feed capacity. A maximum feed rate of 4.3 mg/L could be provided at the 21.05 MGD hydraulic loading with this capacity. 3.16.2 Flocculation Basins The existing flocculation basins have been upgraded to include three-stage baffled flocculation and tapered energy vertical turbine flocculators. They appear to be adequate to meet anticipated maximum day demand of 16 MGD based on detention time and mixing energy provided. This would require a hydraulic loading of 16.8 MGD with a corresponding detention time of about 22.8 minutes. 3.16.3 Sedimentation Basins Addition of a second circular sedimentation basin of equal size to the existing basin would provide the needed future capacity to accomplish conventional treatment for a capacity up to 16 MGD including a hydraulic loading of 16.8 MGD to account for the recovered washwater flow. The weir loading rate would be increased to approximately 21,500 gpd/ft with a surface loading rate of about 680 gpd/sq ft, which is acceptable for turbidity and taste/odor removal from surface water,particularly with the ozone treatment ahead of rapid mixing and flocculation. Current weir and surface loadings respectively, are 20,370 gpd/ft and 650 gpd/sq ft at the rated flow of 8 MGD.The new and existing clarifiers should be each be rated at 8.4 MGD each to meet the hydraulic plant flow of 16.8 MGD. O FRS3540001/Deoember 18,2001. 3-26 g®�L� �I 3.16.4 Filters An ultimate plant capacity of 16 MGD could be achieved by operating the filters and other treatment processes at a slightly increased rate. Assuming a minimum 24-hour filter run length between backwash cycles and 120,000 gallons of water per backwash,the filters would have to handle approximately 480,000 gallons of recovered washwater per day in about 16 hours. They would also have to treat an additional 330,000 gallons to account for the filter down times during backwashes, as the other three filters would maintain a constant filtration rate during backwashes. The resulting filtration rate would be 17.05 MGD (4.22 gpm/sf)to deliver 16 MGD net water production from the plant. This would allow the filters to remain at a constant filtration rate during backwashes and return of recovered washwater. Also,the ozone cooling system will need to be recycled through a cooling tower and diverted from the filters to reduce hydraulic flow when demand is increased. The treatment plant would have to be operated continuously to deliver the 16 MGD net water demand. Current off-peak utilization limits operation to about 18 hours per day between May I and November 1 (6:00 p.m. to 12:00 noon). Alternatively, a 16-MGD capacity for filtration could be met for off-peak operation(18 hours day)and would require two additional filters that would be operated at about 3.8 gpm/sf. This does not appear to be a cost effective solution as there is no room to locate the additional filters. 3.16.6 Washwater Recovery The recovery basins are large enough to handle backwash water from all four filters in one day and should be adequate for operating at 16 MGD. The recommended improvements described earlier should be incorporated to effectively utilize the basin capacity. 3.16.6 Washwater Storage The existing 360,000 gallons of storage capacity and the washwater storage reservoir supply pumps are adequate for buildout capacity. 3.17 Treated Water Quality Trihalomethanes(THMs) which are regulated disinfection byproducts are reportedly about 40 to 45 gg/L in the City's water distribution system. Initially, quarterly running averages exceeded the current (Stage 1) 80 pg/L limit, however current operations average about 50 gg/L. Furthermore, Stage 2 of the D/DBP rule may lower the THM limit to 40µg/L. Therefore, it appears that the facility may have problems reliably meeting Disinfection/Disinfectant Byproduct Rule requirements based on THM formation if the limit is 40 or lessµg/L. The use of ozone for disinfection contact reduces the TTHM formation because ozone does not produce TTHMs. The TTHMs that are formed in the city's water are developed from using free chlorine (sodium hypochlorite) for disinfection residual in the distribution system. FRS3540001/December 18,2001 3-27 130VLE i CThe city does not practice prechlorination of raw water. This also helps reduce TTHM formation because many of the THM precursors are removed in the treatment plant. However.THM formation precursors in the treated water have caused the,running average to exceed the pending standard because hypochlorite disinfection is used in the distribution system. It does not appear that utilizing hypochlorite for primary disinfection during emergencies would cause THM compliance problems as the limits are based on quarterly running averages. This is predicated on utilizing hypochlorite for primary disinfection only during emergencies when ozone is not available. Future changes in raw water quality or more stringent THM limits could be managed by modifying the hypochlorite disinfection feed system to include addition of ammonia feed for chloramine disinfection This would provide a stable residual and prevent formation of THMs. Alternatively,TOC could be reduced with GAC filter media to minimize THM.formation. Hydrogen peroxide is another option for providing oxidation in the treatment plant disinfection process and may warrant further study. Typically,hydrogen peroxide is fed in combination with ozone to generate peroxone. However,there are some handling considerations as food grade hydrogen peroxide is very reactive and can self degrade in the presence of impurities that act as catalysts. This reaction generates tremendous amounts of heat as the peroxide is converted to hot water and steam. 3.18 CT Compliance CThe existing ozone basins and generation facility meet buildout needs up to 20 MGD for required Giardia and virus inactivation. This is based on providing dosages of up to 4.3 mg/L at 20 MGD with a contact time of 8.66 minutes(CT=37.2) which exceed the current design of 3.0 mg/L at 11.4 minutes (CT=34.2)provided the ozone generators can operate at the rated capacity of 750 pounds per day. Also,the ozone provides very reliable Cryptosporidium inactivation. Therefore, it is likely that the existing ozone facilities will provide the ability to effectively inactivate Cryptosporidium to meet future requirements. The future requirements,according to Bruce Macler,Regulations Manager,US EPA Region 9, are likely that 2.0 logs will be required for Cryptosporidium removal/inactivation. Conventional filters will likely be given 2.0 logs of removal credit for Cryptosporidium. Backup disinfection facilities(hypochlorite)will be required to provide CT disinfection during power failure or emergency operation. It is desirable to have supporting data for disinfection contact time to allow proper adjustment of the chlorine feed rate for Giardia and virus CT. Cryptosporidium removal will be provided with filtration media. Deficiencies • Possibly inadequate disinfection contact CT for plant operation during extended power outages. Normally, CT is provided with pretreatment ozonation. During a power failure,hypochlorite will be utilized and requires a considerably longer contact time than ozone. Thus, a tracer study may be required to determine contact time available in the treatment plant and clearwell. C FRS3540001/December 18,2001 3-28 g®�« Recommendations • Conduct a tracer study to verify adequate contact time for emergency disinfection with hypochlorite providing backup CT compliance. This would also require revisions to the emergency operating plan and facility permit. 3.19 Water Supply Limitations The existing water supplies for the treatment plant are limited to the Salinas and Whale Rock Reservoirs. Delivery to the City from Salinas Reservoir is approximately 8.2 MGD and combined delivery from Whale Rock is limited to about 12.2 MGD to all Commission Agencies at any given time. Increasing demand,particularly during drought period,will stress the capacity of these sources to reliably deliver desired water quantities. Therefore, it is important that the City pursue alternate surface water sources to supplement increasing water demand. Treatment requirements for potential new surface water supplies will likely require conventional treatment,which makes the addition of a second sedimentation basin even more important. Limitations • The treatment plant can only treat up to about 8 MGD utilizing Salinas water because of the raw water conduit capacity and conventional treatment capacity limitation with one sedimentation basin. Also,the Whale Rock conduit limits the delivery capacity to all Commission water userrD from Whale Rock Reservoir to about 12.2 MGD. Recommendations • Pursue alternate surface water sources to supplement future water demand needs of the City. 3.20 Phasing Plan for Improvements Consider implementing the recommended improvements in three phases as follows: 3.20.1 Phase 1 Studies • Perform seismic evaluation of the existing treated water storage reservoir clearwell and Washwater Reservoir No. 1. 3.20.2 Phase 11 Improvements • Add second clearwell at the treatment plant. Perform CT tracer study of clearwell for emergency disinfection CT compliance utilizing hypochlorite disinfection. (Priority 1) • Recoat interior of existing clearwell once new clearwell is on line. (Priority 1) C' FRS3540001/December 18.2001 3-29 f30�LE O • Add second sedimentation basin at time if City water demand approaches plant capacity that supplemental water source is secured. (Priority 3) • Recommend control modifications to maintain constant filtration rates during backwash cycles by reducing plant hydraulic flow. (Priority 3) • Modify the existing sedimentation basin drive to facilitate addition of a brush system on the drive mechanism (Priority 3) • Add flow meter to ozone cooling system discharge line to monitor flow to the filters,particularly as demand approaches plant capacity. Consider future modification to ozone cooling water system to incorporate closed loop and cooling tower. (Priority 3/4) • Add one new drying bed including underdrain system if enhanced coagulation is mandated. (Priority 4) • Other recommended improvements include emergency plant operation utilizing hypochlorite for disinfection and Reservoir No. 2 to provide fire protection rather than pumping water from the clearwell. We recommend the City incorporate these improvements as soon as funding can be made available to provide needed water supply reliability and operational flexibility. We recommend phasing the projects based on the priority described above, priority 1 being the most urgent. CWe also recommend incorporating the following minor improvements: • Install a security fence around the forebay to protect water supply. • Repair expansion joints in the forebay. • Provide new ladder in forebay to replace dilapidated one. • Modify washwater inlet control structure to facilitate effective use of Reclamation Basin No. 1. 3.20.3 Phase III Improvements Phase 111 should incorporate the following major improvements: • Provide level monitoring at forebay. • As needed, replace open drip-proof motors on the pumps with high-efficiency motors,which are enclosed and fan cooled. • Recommend coating the black hypochlorite storage tanks with a white paint system to reduce temperature induced decay. O • Consider evaluating the risk and determine recommended improvements to protect the water treatment plant from potential train derailment. FRS3540001/December 18,2001 - 3-30 ����� I' • The washwater inlet control structure should be heightened approximately 6 feet to prevent overflowing the control structure. Extend the washwater basin inlet controls gate operators and add an access stairway. • Consider future relocation of the recovered backwash packaged treatment plant to a higher elevation so that water can return to the ozonation basins by gravity with higher flows. • Consider use of standby power to operate the treatment plant during power outages. The need for this improvement is lessened provided that the City proceeds with the construction of additional water storage in the distribution system as recommended in a later section of this report. (Priority 2). FRS3540001/December 18,2001 3-31 MOVLE C Section 4 Water System Hydraulic Evaluation 4.1 Computer Model Development Hydraulic modeling of the city's water distribution,pumping,and storage system was accomplished using the CyberNET computer model,developed by Haestad Methods, Inc., Waterbury, Connecticut. CyberNET is a water distribution system computer analysis program capable of modeling steady state or extended periodsimulation water flows through pipelines,pressure reducing valves, booster pumping facilities, storage reservoirs,and wells. Digital base map data consisting of street names and parcels,water system pipeline locations, diameters and appurtenances, existing and future land use areas, and topography, were provided by the City for this project. From this data, a computer model network was developed(see Plates 3-1 through 3-8). Data input into the CyberNET model consisted of pipeline geometry,pipeline roughness coefficient, water demands,design criteria,estimated pump curves for booster facilities,pressure reducing valve settings, and storage facility geometry and water levels. Pipeline geometry data included node numbers assigned to pipeline intersections or changes in diameter,ground elevations at each node,the length of prpeline between nodes,pipeline diameter, and roughness coefficient. The roughness coefficients are input as"C" factors as the model utilizes the Hazen-Williams formula (V=1.318CRo.e3Sos4)to solve the friction loss in pipelines. Where: V=Velocity in feet per second C=Roughness coefficient R=Hydraulic radius S=Hydraulic grade line slope in feet per foot of length Node numbers and other data used in the computer model are shown on Plates 3-1 through 3-8).. To distribute water demands throughout the system,demand areas were defined for selected nodes. These demand areas were digitized on a separate AutoCAD layer of the computer model base map. Using the digital land use map provided by the City,the area of each land use category within each demand area was calculated by spatial analysis techniques. The land use areas in each demand area were multiplied by unit demand factors(see Table 24) developed for each land use category, and the resulting water demand was assigned to the corresponding node in the CyberNET model. Point demands, such as Cal Poly and the private water system at the airport, were also included. The model solves for steady state flow in each pipeline segment, and calculates pipeline velocities, headloss, hydraulic gradients, and pressures throughout the system. The model also is capable of plotting selected parameters to assist with the interpretation of model results, including high and low pressures and headloss. O FRS3540001/December 18,2001 4-1 f30�LE Typical English dimensional units were used throughout the evaluation, including feet, inches,gallons per minute(gpm), feet per second(fps), and pounds per square inch (psi). Headloss calculations were made using the Hazen-Williams formula. Roughness coefficients ("C" factors) used in the model are given in Table 1-1. 4.1.1 Model Calibration The CyberNET model was calibrated using fire flows and pressure test data from 32 hydrant locations around the city. Each pressure zone had one or more hydrant flow tests performed within it. The hydrants tested during the calibration period are shown in Table 4-1. This data was compiled by City staff specifically for the master plan. Field test data included specific information concerning critical system conditions, including time of day the test was performed, reservoir levels,the number of pumps on-line,and PRV status. The tests were performed during the fall of 1997, which, based on monthly water production records,translates to an average day demand period. Actual flow and pressure at specific points in the system from this data were compared with values predicted by the computer model under simulated similar conditions(average day demands and hydrant flow values). The results of the model calibration runs, summarized in Table 4-2, indicate that most of the simulated model results were very close to those read in the field. There is some inherent error due to the hilly terrain in San Luis Obispo. The field hydrant locations were not determined with enough detail that their exact locations could be correlated to the model node locations. There was a great deal of time and effort expended in checking each of the 32 hydrant runs against the data provided, considering pump curves were not available and (� PRV setting required individual verification. Numerous model runs had to be made to estimate the pump operating points, and trial and error was often used to duplicate the field results. Often there were model nodes near the assumed hydrant location but not in the exact location. In hilly areas,there could be as much as 10 to 15 feet difference in elevation between a hydrant location and a model node where elevations were input and pressures read from the model run. This difference in elevation could change the results by between 4 and 6 psi in some of the steeper areas. Generally,.however,the calibration runs compared within 3 to 5 psi. The pressure zones that had the greatest variance,as shown in Table 4-2, are the Serrano Zone No. 12, Bishop Zone No. 9,and two of the four tests in the Edna Saddle Zone No. 1. In the future,once the City staff begins to utilize the model for analyzing"what if"scenarios, it is recommended that the booster pumping stations be equipped with pressure gauges and flow meters to determine more accurate pumping curves. Also,the pressure-reducing valves should be calibrated with downstream pressure gauges and a current log maintained with this information. Tables 2-2 and 2-3 could be used as starting points. This information should then be input to the model as time permits. 4.2 Evaluation of Existing System with Existing Development Scenario The existing water system was evaluated using the CyberNET model with water demands generated from the existing development scenario. Numerous model simulation runs were made to test the distribution system's ability to meet normal water demand conditions(average day, maximum day, and peak hour demands), as well as fire flows throughout the system per the criteria stated in Section 1.3. The locations of 28 fire flow analyses runs are shown on Plate 4. A summary of the computer model FRS3540001/December 18,2001 4-2 P30VLE Table 4-1 O City of San Luis Obispo Water Master Plan Model Calibration to 1997 Fire Flow Tests Hydrant Locations Hydrant Test Pressure Zone Number No. Location Cross Street and,Number G-4-3 1 Twin Ridge Patricia Ferrini Heights 13 &5-6 2 Skyline Clover Highland 8 G-r12 3 Fel-Mar 1/2 block W of AI-Hil Highland 8 &6-28 4 Jeffrey Warren Foothill 4 &7-3 .5 Craig Jaycee Patricia Drive 7 &7-22 6 Foothill Los Cerros Patricia Drive 7 &8-16 7 La Entrada 1/3 block S of Luneta Serrano Tank 12 H-8-5 8 Verde Luneta Foothill 4 1-8-23 9 Murray 1/2 block E of Stenner Foothill 4 J-8-12 10 Fredericks Kentucky High Pressure , 11 J-7-7 11 Albert Dr. Mccullom Slack.Street . 10 K-8-2 12 Santa Maria 1/2 block S of Buena Vista Slack Street 10 K-8-22 13 San Luis Drive 500 ft N of Corralitos Andrews Street 6 J-9-41 14 Grand 1/2 block NW of Palm Reservoir#1 5' J-9-14 15 Mill 1/2 block NE of Johnson Reservoir#1 5` O J-10-14 16 California San Luis High School High Pressure 11 1-10-29 17 Walnut Chorro Downtown 2 J-11-16 18 Leff Toro Downtown 2 K-11-10 19 Hilltop Jr. High Off Lizzie High Pressure 11 L-12-21 20 . Nipomo Pismo Downtown 2 J-19-27 21 Bushnell Bishop Terrace Hill 3' K-13.27 22 LaVineda End of street Bishop Street 9 1-13-21 23 Sandercock King Downtown 2 J-14-21 24 Meadow Woodbridge Downtown 2' J-15-24 25 Chandler 32, if Broad/Cadhill Terrace Hill 3 L-15-3 26 Southwood 1/2 block E of Woodside Terrace Hill 3 M-15-3 27 Southwood 1/4 block E of Sequoia Bishop Street 9 M-19-13 28 Ironbark Brookpine Terrace Hill 3 E-15-21 29 Descanso Los Osos Valley Road Edna Saddle 1 &16-15 30 Dalidio 3/4 block E of Madonna Road Edna Saddle 1 &19-7 31 Calle Joaquin North end, W of Hwy 101 Edna Saddle 1 &21.12 32 Mirador Los Palos Drive I Edna.Saddle 1 "Results not provided. O FRS3640001 12/18rz001 BOYLE tables.xls N N d m � 3 mc`Scx = .? y W rn � a om c°n' No � 0M � No c4 J c m R m n IM a o o «� � > m E �' > c � m c y c � o c as (� mV >3c Teo a-6 ca m cm y av :3 6N 3 1o � -E T m n 2 0 "a CL U) tm CL (A 6 oL > > N oC co o CL CL ca a a0n in" waLuo oaa oa a °a a o 6 a N N N N N O o 0- 5 a 3 a ° aom acla ca claa9 a nso o a T o Q o o �^ c aN m _ m E 3 a3 R3v e—�o3 � m m3 O aJ l0 d N N C) dJ CCC N O F N a Y LL a O a O a C a> Y a C C C. 3 = V j = U 7 = O 7d W joCc H A a a O a Q a Q CL IX O a y in o g . N o v in o v c_"u 'c rn o m p 9E.C.. N In lb LL a. COLL NC/) O 3 C m u CO .M- O m m .N. N C O Z v R C%) N N 7 4) m Z O O r r p oa a � - -- - - oCLc — � m > C c Hp o 0 7t o _ M o N O a� og i° � 0Lt9 mm rnrn 3 Co � LL N w ea m o 00 > c _a co 0 4- m � V) 0a � Lo IV cc = n orn m « c LL � q m N U- r Ln CO co O O •- O O Q 4 M N p Q Q T e O m m m m m Z O O o 0 0 cN Z Z Z Z Z = 3 LL LL U. 'u. LL O :3 7 3 .7 7 m N 0 C) EN d E m m E d m E g 0: E a a 0 a a CL"T CD corn rn rn rn NaCD NaN 41aIV Naa NaCco OD N H2O H � � H �.N H � � O v x CtoO C ov Cv *6 IT E � CCN °�' N Z LL LL lL LL m LL O o � a mMc. w o eT u3i 0) of ' Y 0 Y v ca E W Zp m c ULo m m arc fl c J O 7m O E C C Oco O 0 O aimcA 0 . co m a `� a ca cocon . c«a m o0 0 E E o co CL c � a_o � 0) Z0 o EL � . _ co m c 0 Cl'y i c y L cn N LL E m c U m a z m ° x � '0 r an CL E 0 L ep m L ao m c o m ms I o c 0.+K Ucoa Ucoa a m cLL � na m rnm o E 0 C O �O n O U ' '. r eO r Oa 7 r v a catch _ a o Or r N «N m ,a0O 100co to co cc 0' Q k c - Q P9 vi ca ft O U c U GO UJ W a G LL 0tS a °a a J U r J rim CL m 0 3 e ca o v ate — 06 Cd m m o m momma Caama m LL Q ca c a cLL d m FL 0 LU o W .4) :° m o> `a d "=U' 0)« m CO N ea 0. m m CL— m e1 Q m eco f. _j -j o LLU o = U. ocod 2 � O � cmLr) rNi co eco co m LL.0 0 M o Z r4. rz.Q Q eo coo o c Q N oa �) Z 4 4 0 o O 3 A � � 9 0 ~ Opo Mw � y m •- cov o 0ti eioo _ m oo M a cu r� rn o m c LL co 00 « 3 V w « o m co (D Q GooGNo M. 0Ni N CNOe�0 co Q Q 0i Q Q O O r Z "00 '06 'm0 Z 2 2 Z Z AMd 0 i c U. 0 U) 7 3 7 0 3 0 U) m m a d cm E m d E m E c wit Ix a cCC n N 47CL N Onf N tm N M N D1 41 co 'OitIm a I— � co Horn N o C ca mc c ro v cS ca m L aoi �' m N /6 Z m r m ~ �� �� _ LL .� IL a = = a w o W Z J c C � m O U CL c E rn n 0 c N = N.= -O > O ?+ C U U @ Rw w w "' C f6 r O 7 7 O (D Of0 �� C U o m o iv CL d d o d o O u0i 0. a O CL no o U a o ca 7 7 � N m CLY m m m a Y a Y ? 3 O cc cc C LL m m .2H = F- Ie 3 '� O y C C O Y O Y U m J M O O r 47 4: rU R U f0 L C W O W -Co Cq C52 fn fn.__ - _ U Q_co O g0 C m O N c LO N CSO « LL « a0 R O Z O 7 7 O O CO W W Q � 0 H � O� 2 LL — ON ('7 Cp �S Ccr)' 0) N LO IO 04 Ln _ � S 00 to CO f'7C.0 IT m � O l4 UU w .c " `� � � n � aeon vv mm r- co .. m y � � LL m in CO Ln N LOM N co g 2 4 C? 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z Z Z Z Z Z a LLk h LL U LL. L O m W 1 W I N 1 N N 4. S MO 7 = 7 N 7 = 7 y 7 w n j N j 47 j O) j U, 3 U) j m W N N G) N O N d N O N O co Ir CL ow l_ � X a N � ch x cm w mCb co mcg m v� mo •— mn °' m O)' r N 'O Cl) h CD N 'O O N O N 'O N a m OtD m ON m ON d1 O � d 00 m 0c'0co CL lie ^" L. 7 U d O O m 0 C Z Lmy �. 0) N r r0 U CD co N 0 N S2 N = a = 2 cn cn Q m � � 4) O a) O 'O a p pc-5 Z a 0 Z « C C t m 0 L y 0 W. O m L U U SCm U O 4) .5 O0N Lld p a p c O v m J :° o fn 0 ua 3 = 0 � � 3 — m _ 3 o L 3 0 t Ea m ) c m = t � c � c aa) t � � � c ov y y yd mLL a tl m a) LL a �jLoc > 0y � opoord > vootti > m � o � a� Ord o � 0 � a) � � mLL a c CL m .ow Ha _ gma �, o c c c Im a) LO a a N c 0 c 0 o p0 - 4) LO U yN NO C-4 m rw 0N0-- ON ON CT .. m N O N O C O m � ONN ON C7 7 V m V C4 O Cn O C? p 0 O > -> a' O � � ma ma w ; moo > '~` M > c Ll o a o $ oat m � a m a p ` U. C c a � � a � cv ov c o 2 2 m S 2 m m c d H «S o m as 0 oU 0 0 08 _ ai _ U L rr m wow Ca0H rani w a) N a) O` a) 4) 0 0 0 a) 02 mm HF- m HH CL LL 75 a. LL_0 - 0 _O N C d N n N C .N r O f7 tC 00 Z N A N N Cn m ID mm 2 Q O O O 4 E OU., m CL CQ0. �. - - -- - - --- - ATS .0 0 C F■ O p p LL CA CA !A .L.. fA O O CO 1- v CO a0 N m SN N CD CO f0 f0 w CO C w O O m S N CR LL m N d OC.) - .. 0 _ _ O V .5 Ml 0 in nn m (D m y b aJ LL a) > w N n V co N O r 1 M a) C O 4 O O Q 4 7 C Z 10 m U p Z 2 Z Z Z CC6 m � d N N` N � al lL LL lL LL LL O) r a) a) = mr ' W w 7 . U) m a) N N aco N N a) U) a) u1 � � E mM a C a � w fin. c o N m 0 N o O N y m y N O a) 0 Ln r N O N N o m amt O N N O > co F2 � O O d m p 0 a) LL 0 W N , N m m O L 'C C. O -j0 O N O M E U L L m W O .0 m W .0 N3 a s 0 � `a d N C N m c N � � 3 = N coir = p ir °' O �aWyLO aW m -0c � oc o > CLL U-0aW 0) U- Na 0U O20 o L m a' O O L m m C C N rr Y CL C. or 9 — z .. NO N Q O � O " � 0 0 9 p .�' O m O a' C V N i C) m m L .. o > "m � > m a � a � O F it a c � d OTCL 0 CL 0 m m m L_ Ca � .0 'O i .0 C1W C) m r co co C m v a m V C. c c C W LL a8 O aS °3 O C W C W U a. L — L •6 c C 0 0 4) a19i0o aWi00 C : mCr3 CL U- Z atL � - 0 W o W o O 3 m cn co Nm m ' O CIn) U. N N M Wm N m O Z N m Z O wcm O U.oN �rm of ' �m F- O 010 z .2 O a c c � m—co "" U. yOco (�U. m M (C NN W (O O m O C. n (C ao 00 N J C m L 'O O N N J N •. (p ` m ov 3 > L 'O « (7 o a. _ O Q C �f V 0 q N O N = m ao (C O O �rw m (Om � hmt Oa ^ � Q7m .Z N ` r O m N LL U ; > a N ao `o LO CD N N (7 In C NO N 1 1 O 4 4 Q d C Z O O O O U Z Z z Z O c ii iI M ii M p N N N N C LL N 0 f0A j N 3 001 7 0m1 m0: C. mm C. � � C. cl clC O N m O N N O N m C7 (07 N = coo N O co(Ov1 in (D N O A N � Cn m co m EaaNoC N C N 'O 'O 'O y z 3 w � wmp � LL m m N Z � w � J m c N } c E U � L m o � o o � o � _ o � o p ;r 9 � O — _ O Q' o Q' a Jaz CL m m m m m C =co _U) U. m m 6 a ` c ca c LL a W CLU a m o aci aci d w m _ m _ mN �O m o m 3 m CD v cn o c m cn « m « to M Z N 3 i m Z O O a 0u' mm � - c. y _o _ CD co m N ° v •• 3 3 _ V O _ mtLL om co W W N s m S � m M O O O ,m0 v Z O O wy Z. Z m 3 U- U- 0 y y Y. 7 .y 3 r N Q' G N d' G f7 01 M co f�A N f�A r � O r � � F-0 pfA m o W p W O l�L.. runs made for maximum day plus fire flow is included in Table 4-3. Complete computer printouts of selected model results are included in the Appendix. A peak hourly model run was also made and is included in the Appendix. The results of the peak hourly run show that system pressures are above 35 psi in almost all areas throughout the city. A few areas at the higher elevations, such as Prefumo Canyon Road and parts of Patricia Heights, are between 30 and 35 psi during peak hourly demands.. The computer analysis was performed assuming none of the wells were available for supply due to the uncertainty of this supply during previous years. An evaluation was also made of the ability of existing water supply and storage facilities to meet existing demand conditions. A summary of the storage requirements to meet existing demands including emergency, fire, and operating storage is presented in Table 4-4. A summary of the booster pumping capacities to provide maximum day demands plus replenish fire and emergency storage in five days is presented in Table 4-5. This analysis of existing booster pump capacities is presented to show the pump's ability to provide maximum daily demand plus replenish fire and emergency storage,not to provide fire flows. Fire flows are provided from storage tanks,with the exception of the Alrita pressure zone, which cannot provide fire flows from storage or from booster pumps. This table demonstrates that for the pressure zones that are supplied solely by booster pumps,the existing booster pumps are adequately sized to meet this established criteria for the current City water demands. However, due to lack of storage, the Alrita Zone cannot provide fire flows. Following is a summary of the results of the computer model runs, storage requirements and booster pump capacity as given in Tables 4-3, 44, and 4-5 for the existing water system. • Maximum Day Plus Fire Flow—Deficiencies and Solutions 1. Edna Saddle Zone a. Deficiency: A fire flow of 4,500 gpm with a residual pressure above 20 psi cannot be maintained in some industrial and commercial areas of the Edna Saddle Zone near Los Osos Valley Road and Gamette. However,A fire flow of 4,000 gpm can be maintained in these areas and has been approved by the Fire Department as an acceptable amount. A fire flow of 1,500 gpm with a residual pressure of 20 psi cannot be maintained in the Castillo and Pref imo Canyon residential area in the Edna Saddle Zone; however, a 1,000-gpm fire flow can be maintained. b. Solution: Providing a new reservoir in the Prefumo Canyon area to meet fire flow and operating storage requirements in the Edna Saddle Zone would increase fire flow capacities to this area. The maximum water surface elevation should be approximately 344 to match the Edna Saddle Tank. It should be connected to the existing 16-inch main in Los Osos Valley Road with a new 12-inch main. The new main would be approximately 500 feet in length. This would raise pressures in the Prefumo Canyon area to approximately 35 psi under 1,500-gpm fire flow conditions and 40 psi during maximum day conditions. The size of this reservoir would be approximately 200,000 gallons to provide a 1,500 gpm fire flow for 2 hours plus operational storage. FRS3540001/December 18,2001 4-10 f30�LE Table 43 O San Luis Obispo Water MasterPlan Model Results for Maximum Day Demand.Plus Fire Flow Existing System Pressure.Zone Residual Max. Pipe Number Location, Node No. Plow Pressure Velocity and Name and Land Use m i f 1. Edna Saddle Los Osos Valley Road and Gamette J-01-357 (public facility, school) 3,000 2.1 5.5 1. Edna Saddle Los Osos Valley Rd, & Madonna Rd. 4,500 12 6.2 J-01-234 (commercial) 4,000 23 5.6 3,000 41 4.4 1. Edna Saddle Castillo and Prefumo 1,500 14 6.2 J-01-529(SFR) 1,000 25 4.1 1. Edna Saddle Granada and Sueldo 4,500 14 15.0 J-01-143 (industrial) 4,000 27 13.4 3,000 50 10.0 1. Edna Saddle Madonna Road and EI Mercado 4,500 58 8.0 J-01=107 (commercial) 1. Edna Saddle Prado, south of Edna Saddle Tank J-01-007 industrial 4,500 32 7.7 2. Downtown Bianchi and Higuera 4,500 64 3.4 J-02.150 (industrial) 1 2. Downtown Marsh and Garden 4,500 46 7.6 J-02.327 (retail and office) 2. Downtown Broad and Branch 4,500 23 11.7 J-02-426 (industrial) 32 if Broad/Caudill PRV is open 2. Downtown Peach and Santa Rosa 4,500 21 13.5 (retail and office) 29 if Hathaway/ Montalban and Broad/Caudill PRVs are open 3. Terrace Hill Rosemary and Poinsettia 1,500 77 4.3 J-03-347(SFR) 3. Terrace Hill Bullock and Willow Cirde 4,500 71 9.2 J-03-032(industrial/commercial) 3. Terrace Hill Bullock and McMillan 4,500 70 4.2 J-03-025 industrial/commercial 4. Foothill Foothill and Ferrini 4,500 33 8.3 J-04-026 commercial O FRS3540001 12/182001 BOYLE tables.xis Table 4-3 San Luis Obispo Water Master Plan Model Results for Maximum Day Demand Plus Fire Flow Existing System Pressure Zone Residual Max. Pipe Number Location, Node No. Flow Pressure Velocity and Name and Land Use m (psi) f 4. Foothill Princeton and Highland 1,500 23 11.5 J-04-041 SFR 5. Res.#1 Monterey and Garfield 4,500 33 5.1 J-05-009(commercial) 3,000 42 4.5 5. Res.#1 Phillips and Pepper 3,000 21 13.8 J-05-052 commercial 6. Andrews Andrews and Alisal 1,500 42 8.5 J-06-013 SFR 7. Patricia Patricia and Craig 1,500 -32 10.9 J-07-012(SFR) 1,000 11 8.3 500 34(poor capacity) 7.1 1,500 40 if PRV is added 7.4 to Highland Zone 7. Patricia Patricia and Westmont 500 -3 6.0 J-07-023 (SFR) 0 30(poor capacity) 5.0 1,500 38 if PRV is added 9.4 to Highland Zone 8. Highland AI-Hil cul-de-sac(SFR) 1,500 31 5.4 J-08-010 9. Bishop Southwood and Barranca 1,500 29 4.1 J-09-021 (SFR) 9. Bishop Johnson and Bishop 3,000 39 off 12"main 9.2 J-09-077 and J-09-070(hospital) 1,000 27 off 6" main 11.9 10. Slack Slack and Henderson 1,500 47 7.4 J-10-022 SFR 11. High Pressure Foothill and Carpenter 31000 88 12.4 J-11-049 (high-density residential 12. Serrano Luneta and Hermosa 1,500 10 7.0 J-12-014(SFR) 1,000 37 5.0 1,500 62 if Verde Ave. 10.3 pipeline south of Luneta is used to supply Zone 12 13. Ferrini Twinridge and Patricia 1,500 80 9.6 J-13-011 SFR 14. Alrita Alrita and Bahia 1,500 42 8.8 J-14-007 SFR 15. Rosemont Highland Avenue 1,500 49 8.5 J-15-010 SFR FRS3540001 12/1812001 tablesAs BOYLE a a ins o � u a # -t " A�W N -� CO = N Ut @' a v y � CD 0 A W •� T o m A m� 0) (A X w2 W Cl) Dy @ Op Q N (A N .S p.@ O it:� � 0) s a a O W o OHO °.d �, � CD DtT@ 0 y 0 0) S 0) im o x_. ? p 0) p 3 a � = p cn O o,o 0) ;► O. O C@F fn 3c_',c 6 0W0 2 a O M 0) O CO '� N m.0) a 0 Q 0 @ 0.1 CL o 0 @0) @ iCD m w O O 7 3 'O = F � a w O - @ 0) DC r <: CD'i CS 6. .7, o OD CD C m 0 = v _ a CD CD Np @ I@ (wQ (�� . O as 0) 7 j w''wc0 0) , (.: 3 m CT j N @O@64x pp oo 64 m A p 0 O. .O. ( W A A OD CAO W N A +0 0)W 7 C' • 3 7 g'OO O N V 00 j @ DTco co 0) » O 5 0)..-6Op M < V N m cam SEA o@ CT A V co N N CT W x 1 W @ 'O y0 NCA Co O V s O p'tG d 3 W ' Cn O oto m f°cD N w w myCA w m V W A N W COO co OD r X d w 0 - W CID co N W N 00ca 5= m OCD x. a 3 c fl' N Co m N< C y aj'7 3, A W A M coO O � . CO X m N W CT W O N W A 00 m 3 D N g CO F � _ w =ram _ _0 CD _ _ cc 3 M p W CD W W N N m O N x on O CA co co 02 0 @ 7. 7 w m c m m OD w �' w CO CO x Co O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 oo e3a � n -n � T �o ao o,o o 0 a C w ' -i c c c A CD 0) 3 w W D > > > rn m am aCD = m ro w w w + w gj — 0) 0) _ n 71 71a a v _ �. -�. m 3 v ° 0 CD in 71 y =_a a m O ov V O OD A OD OD m x O 7 A O co N t C m d C) @ CC OCA 4 �+ O CT co W cn x2 co W co W W N O O (WT p-• w 039 CL m 0) CL OD CWT fT i W W A O N K.C w • a w OD V f77 O 1 O a C w a w O 00 a m O 0 O a 0) Sm0 -W11 ;o pTVNO' � -DmXA CL CD M N Q 7 7 y <7 N N 0) 0) 2) 0) 0) 'S' 0@0 ' N0) LM fns 0) W N o a0m o S? m o Ow 0) 0 OL o m -0 ON ° ° r. a°i @ ao @ 3 i i I 7.@ 0) I O C7 N 0) N Cr 0) @ ° (n§ p N $ S C o � ° � p�i �� afv3 @ m N 01 (U y ;uQp o d 41 61 Cf 3 w �• m o a 0) -00) N ;a 0) ' -0 CO D @ ' 10 aN C -1 N7 • 'U an 0) C7 ... ...-, s . � c 0) 'O O@ C 7 a V CJ 0) 3 7 G O O@ Z7 � @@ 0) c CG � - D - = Dc � @@ � <X Mo 3p m R < -a .-13 mci < c3 �i � 61 a x O7 O_ -� �a @ °_ c 00 @`G a. i 0) C Q < 3 C c •M@ w @_ @ p o o w @ 3 �@ S. a0 @ @ c. 0 @ @ CD :E CD @SSR mO ° 3 S@o v3 < � 61 ° � 3 (a Z � @Fp O^ w d O ai A ? @ CD 9 W p O - Cl)x A @ w M D w < O c@moo ° mom �3 m v ° � w �° � � om � � Ov mawom � • CD -tCDm. 0) G) mm m xo 2 a@ <accG) 3 ? �° � �06a � D C m n G G Ol O 23 a @ F (D O ID �i O 03 @ 2 W N < F0)f0 GO a � (na 3 1 @ 3 a DS3 'm d �-0 a ° 3 ° m � ° @ ' < a aFf° < $ o a � cc to a. c@ a m m@a o'G) a a@n o > Dc o c o m F a � Q. 0 >m 3 ° w v o O @ < < � i9) °= a F30) N6jo a ° < v a@@ -O CL— a@ m o 0 �c M @v o ° K) p p w w � c -`� 0) 3 c w o@ @ > > Sw p . mawom3 3 � o w � o @ � � � o ;u l< CL ° cmD@o > 0. — ow @ ° F m ° 3 m 5'(M 3 G)M D �Y) a° m o d °' x °' w a 6 0) 3 3 � @ otc @ m w� @ v@, @ am �v <fO ^ m °f m > > m oo@ c w0 a ° m n1O � 3 oow � ma@ c 3 60) 3 co cn a @ m . ° !g x. dap - � m�� w 7Dc.. CD :3 @c WO O .° < .ax W 7 @ G O # O ? 0) G O0 O CL d w A N @ S j m N p) p V O@ � =:G) @ � N 0)Tr 0 U ° 0) 3 � o @yOx CL m0) 3mx F . \ \ \ W . . � 0 O c k 2 a c m c 0 .£ 2 a ° e § � ga2a £ � em £ o % a) >1 >1 , — 0 s — mom - gym = � ka �aaa § a � 2 ee — � E2CLs n � E ,Cr an �CF � Cr� E � � � t7 = c 'E2 . 2a2 ƒ$ § $ S « k ■ ee �� � � , � ( � KcoE _ aa � � m , . a. M — R fk $k § � kM WOMME � $ ( § -a § CL e ƒ 2CL 283CL \ � � � � ± e ƒ 8 ] f / [■ J Cl) � \ & e / % ■ & © $ b 2 ■ o k• e¥ Na a. u � >1 $ Cc ■ § . . i IM wE k k G c G / n o ® \' E � _ ] g� Ld m ®, 6 § � 2 / c 5 = z Q > � . — n e �CA M $ .2 E L ' Zc ,0 e § ._ o ■.� 0 a z� 2 8 8 2 ' B S B S § ƒ 0 ■. § EZ � — — 2 ■ ; » a - ) � $ © � ■ 0. k ■ - E � \ 0 0 I C.§ Lo co ) k&/� # §k > E E $ \ @ Im . � J2 E ~ .0I § ] a > mb 2 § � & § - 0 f\ k 0 k k k E j % B \ § CM @ * tF] k �� � � � � �� � e Qr2 E � 2 � & 2 ■ � E 2 k G Go G $ G � 2 G k � W - co � — R R R 0 w k CL 2 Cq ® r o n _ eG £ § - CL E o ■ § ■.E \2I ƒ 2 ) ® ƒ 8 8 § 8@ § S ƒ a 0 ¥ § 7f E ■ . 0 a k � § ( D ( ( k gym § - k § ko 0 2§ CL a � C m � � � zCLC � I { k 222k f - k %tk3 - o (D \ % < C'4 / LL fE % ) ■ k . . . g8g,k2k . ■ § � � » L � 0 Another alternative would be to connect the Foothill Zone No.4 near Foothill Boulevard and Ferrini Road to the Edna Saddle Zone No. 1 via a new 12-inch main approximately 16,000 feet in length along west Foothill Boulevard to Los Osos Valley Road near Diablo Drive. This alternative would extend a water main outside of the present city limits. This would increase pressures in this area to approximately 30 psi under 1,500 gpm fire flow conditions and 46 psi during maximum day conditions. A pressure-regulating valve station would also be needed to regulate the pressures between the higher Foothill Zone and the Edna Saddle Zone. 2. Downtown Zone a. Deficiency: A fire flow of 4,500 gpm with a residual pressure just slightly above 20 psi can be maintained in the industrial area in the southeast part of the Downtown Zone. b. Solution: The pressure can be increased if the Broad/Caudill PRV is open where there is a fire flow simulated in the southeast part of this zone. This is also true of the Hathaway/Montalban PRV in the northeast area of this zone. 3. Reservoir No. 1 Zone a. Deficiency: A fire flow of 4,500 gpm with a residual above 20 psi cannot be maintained in the northeast commercial areas near Phillips and Pepper in the Reservoir No. 1 Zone; however, a 3,000-gpm fire flow can be maintained,which has been determined by the Fire Department to be adequate. b. .Solution: Difficult to correct due to the number of 6- and 8-inch mains in this area. Would have to upsize many mains to achieve a fire flow of 4,000 gpm. 4. Patricia Zone a. Deficiency: A fire flow of only 500 gpm with a residual pressure above 20 psi can be maintained in the northern areas of the Patricia Zone. b. Solution: A fire flow of 1,500 gpm can be obtained if a PRV is installed on the main in Patricia Avenue between Clover and Westmont Avenues connecting the Patricia Zone and Highland Zone. 5. Bishop Zone a. Deficiency: A fire flow of 3,000 gpm with a residual above 20 psi can be maintained off the 12-inch main in the Bishop Street Zone near the hospital at Flora and Bishop but cannot be maintained from the adjacent 6-inch or 8-inch mains. A fire flow of 3,000 gpm is required at the hospital. b. Solution: This fire flow can be provided from the hydrants connected to the 12-inch main along Johnson or near the Bishop Pump Station. The Fire Department should test the hydrants surrounding the hospital and mark the hydrants that can deliver 3,000 gpm FRS3540001/December 18,2001 415 ®YLE O so they will know which to use during a fire. If this is not satisfactory,the 12-inch main along Johnson should be connected to the hospital mains. 6. Serrano Zone a. Deficiency: A fire flow of only 1,000 gpm with a residual pressure above 20 psi can be maintained in the Serrano Zone at Luneta and Hermosa. b. Solution: A fire flow of 1,500 gpm can be provided if the pipeline on Verde Avenue is used to supply the Serrano Zone,thereby looping the zone. 7. Akita Zone a. Deficiency: A fire flow of 1,500 gpm cannot be maintained in the Alrita Zone (residential area)due to lack of storage and pumping capacity. b. Solution: The Alrita hydropneumatic tank and pump station should be abandoned and replaced with a new 1,600-gpm fire pump plus two duty pumps(approximately 150 gpm capacity each)for normal demands. Provide a new hydropneumatic tank with SCADA controls at the pump. The station should be provided with either permanent auxiliary power or a plug-in for a portable generator. As an alternative,a 200,000-gallon storage tank for just this area could be constructed,which would eliminate the hydropneumatic tank system. • Pipeline Velocities—Deficiencies and Solutions Pipeline velocities exceeding 10 fps under fire flow conditions were experienced in the following few cases as shown in Table 4-3. 1. Edna Saddle Zone: In the industrial area at Granada and Sueldo in the Edna Saddle Zone with a flow rate of 4,500 gpm. If the fire flow requirement is reduced to 3,000 gpm,the maximum pipe velocity is reduced to 10 fps. 2. Downtown Zone: In the industrial area at Broad-and Branch in the Downtown Area with a flow rate of 4,500 gpm. If the fire flow requirement is reduced to 3,000 gpm,the maximum pipe velocity is reduced to 7.9 fps. 3. Foothill Zone: In the residential area at Princeton and Highland in the Foothill Zone at 1,500 gpm. The pipe velocity in this area,which is primarily served by 6-inch mains, is just slightly over the 10-fps criteria. To reduce this velocity would require upsizing or paralleling the majority of the 6-inch mains with 8-inch main in this area,which may not be cost effective. As pipelines are replaced with new ones due to age,it is recommended that the City maintain its current policy of 8-inch minimum pipe size. 4. Reservoir No. 1 Zone: In the commercial area at Phillips and Pepper in the Reservoir No. 1 Zone with a flow rate of 3,000 gpm,the maximum pipe velocity is 13.8 fps. To reduce this • velocity would require upsizing the majority of the 64nch and 8-inch mains in this area with FRS3540001/December 18,2001 4-16 g��« 10-inch mains,which may not be cost effective. However, in the long term, the model can be used to determine specific pipeline sizes when mains are replaced due to age. 5. Patricia Zone: In the residential area at Patricia and Craig and at Patricia and Westmont in the Patricia Zone with a flow rate of 1,500 gpm. If a connection to the Highland Zone with a PRV at the north end of Patricia between Westmont and Clover Avenues is made,the velocity is reduced to less than 10 fps with an increase of pressure to above 35 psi. 6. High-Pressure-Zone: In the high-density residential area at Foothill and Carpenter in the High-Pressure Zone at a flow rate of 3,000 gpm. The 10-inch main on Foothill is unlooped, creating the higher velocities (although the pressures are more than adequate). Looping the main with an 8-inch main to Hathaway would require additional right-of-way, but would reduce velocities to approximately 10 fps. This solution is not recommended due to cost and value to the system. • Storage Volume Requirements—Deficiencies and.Solutions The storage volumes required to satisfy the evaluation criteria are given in Tables 4-4 and 4-6. In some cases, additional storage is available from other upper storage reservoirs via pressure- reducing valves (see comments in Table 4-4). For example,Reservoir No..3 (clearwell) and Reservoir No.2 can supply the Edna Tank Zone via pressure-reducing valves. However,fire flow is diminished if the lower tanks are emptied and supply is from the pressure-reducing valves(in this case the Madonna/Higuera PRV). For example, a fire flow of approximately 1,500 gpm would be possible at Los Osos Valley Road and Prefumo Canyon Road if the Edna Saddle Tank were emptied and only the Madonna/Higuera PRV provided flows. In reality, the Edna Saddle Tank would have water to meet emergency and operational storage if the Madonna/Higuera PRV supplied water at a pressure adequate to maintain the tank level. Figure 4-1 illustrates this concept of shared storage between major pressure zones and upper reservoirs. If the analysis is based strictly on this criteria alone, storage is not needed to meet the established criteria in these zones. Additional storage in the other smaller zones is required as described below. In summary,the following storage reservoir changes are recommended to satisfy existing demands and other operational criteria: 1. Edna Saddle Zone. Maintain the upper operating level in Edna Saddle Tank to approximately 1 to 2 feet below the overflow to obtain maximum storage for Edna Saddle Pressure Zone. Plan for future 0.20-MG tank with a maximum water surface of 344 in Prefumo Canyon area to provide better pressures and residential fire flows plus storage for the Perfumo Canyon area. 2. Reservoir No. 3 (clearwell). The existing 4-MG clearwell provides storage to the Downtown, Foothill,and Edna Saddle Zones directly or by gravity through pressure- reducing valves. Based on the previous analysis, a second storage reservoir is not necessary to meet the storage requirement criteria for the City distribution system. Providing a second clearwell storage reservoir for reasons stated in Section 3 should be discussed by City staff tc� FRS3540001/December 18,2001 4-17 g��LF Table 4.6 San Luis Obispo Water Master Plan C, Emergency, Fire,and Operating Storage Requirements for Major Pressure Zones Existing Condition (MG) Total Zone Emergency Fire Operating Requirement 1. Edna Saddle 2.231 0.96 0.944 4.135 2. Downtown and Foothill 1.848 0.96 0.782 3.590 3. High-Pressure with Cal 1.021 0.54 0.151 1.712 Poly and Andrews Street 4. Reservoir No. 1 0.317 0.54 0.133 0.990 5. Terrace Hill 0.990 0.96 0.418 2.368 Total 12.795 Buildout Condition (MG) Total CZone Emergency Fire O erating Requirement i 1. Edna Saddle 4.096 0.96 1.885 6.941 2. Downtown and Foothill 1.864 0.96 0.868 3.692. 3. High-Pressure with Cal 1.043 0.54 0.173 1.756 Poly andAndrews Street 4. Reservoir No. 1 0.317 0.54 0.135 0.992 5. Terrace Hill 1.386 0.96 0.644 2.990 Total 16.371 See Section 1.3.4 for storage criteria. C FRS3540001 12/182001 BOYLE tables.ids -o_; � va v �m0 , !� O='i O rrD >Z wry = oz D � D Z-4 Z � D m O --1 M \ c;i K 0 �' Z G7 Z Zr N N vNi (rri A m 3:0 �m N r < CTr axa a� v► m CA � < a rri mzrri rnio_ C) OD O r+i a -n c')a r� r� (+1 W < W 0 a r., okras Z N Z 0 V c a43 �a z D ; � c a rn rn w -4 m rr O N A itrrl _ X z� z < z yam s= v r+ z a > K > a s �Am cx r -0N ata rr- C O -9 c m Z�H ; H -o MR a Z o ym D � � N < 1 z N N r 0 MG XX ;o ; D O W D 1 Cas Gam? D i m 0 �\ m \\�� NO < v 0 O O� L4 vZ = 6 / rnr co / r � ;a � > / CHORRO/ < c o / FOOTHILL "a0 N T:: I o MZ v PRV < NZ N D D O D CA 0cy \ pZ retic cn m m D 0.045 M m 0 HATHAWAY N o o� Z MONTALBAN Z m PRV m g t N tC� ca PEACH ST � PRV ZN0 m .. mc = o v 0 A Z m O D A 0 V 0v v o m SAN LUIS DR/ JOHNSON PRV Mo rn N z � GRAND/WILSON -PRV oF � ><00 m r 0 m CALIF/MONTEREY PRV A -'omI c) "' N ND0 0 NO < ELLA/BINNS PRV o ED Z Z D G7 m 00 z ;o c� oMr m No(n N m o;uov m OD zM;o 46 rn m K 0 a N N w NON G7 Z>M Q. iA < WFrn � _ � 0 F � ^ r T YJ v \J n < m m m g I determine if the redundancy, earthquake safety, and operational and maintenance C" enhancements are sufficient to warrant the expense of a new storage reservoir. 3. Terrace Hill Zone. Connect Reservoir No. 1 to Terrace Hill Zone via a PRV at Ella and Swazey Avenues for added storage for Terrace Hill Zone. 4. Bishop and Alrita Zones. Provide a new 1.2-MG Bishop storage tank at the same location and elevation as the Bishop Tank. Keep the Bishop Pump Station in service. Abandon the Alrita Pump Station and hydropneumatic tank and install a new pump station including a 1,600-gpm fire pump with portable or permanent auxiliary power and a larger hydropneumatic tank,or a 200,000 gal storage tank at a higher elevation to provide system pressure. The new Bishop Tank could also serve the Terrace Hill Zone via an existing but inactive PRV at Southwood and Johnson Avenues. This PRV would help to maintain fire flows to the Terrace Hill Zone if activated.. 5. Slack Street Zone. Increase the McCollom Pump Station in capacity to 1,600 gpm to provide fire flow with permanent auxiliary power facilities or a plug-in for a portable generator. The Slack Street tank will remain in service. 6. High-Pressure Reservoir No. I and Andrews Street Zones. Raise upper operating levels in Reservoir No. 1 and No. 2 to approximately 1 to 2 feet below the overflows to obtain maximum storage for benefiting pressure zones. Regulate the tank volumes with the City telemetry system and altitude valves to prevent water stagnation in the tanks and to maintain O chlorine residuals. Reservoir No. 2 may require repairs if raising the water levels causes leakage. 7. Rosemont. Highland,and Ferrini.Zones. Provide additional storage to Ferrini Zone and provide PRV bypass valves to allow flows to Highland and Patricia Zones. This will benefit the Highland and Patricia Zones. As an option to adding storage, add a fire pump and auxiliary power to the Ferrini Pump Station.. Abandon the Highland Tank and add 1,600-gpm fire pump with auxiliary power or a plug-in for a portable generator at anew Rosemont Pump Station.. 8. Serrano and Patricia Zones. Provide additional storage to the Serrano Zone,which will also benefit the Patricia Zone. As an option,the Bressi Pump Station could be enlarged to 1,600 gpm and provided with permanent auxiliary power or a plug-in fora portable generator to provide fire flow from Reservoir Nos. 2 and 3. Storage reservoir recommended changes to satisfy buildout demands are contained in Section 4.3 and should be considered in conjunction with the above recommendations. • Booster Pump Capacity—Deficiencies 1. The booster pumping stations, as shown in Table 4-5,are adequately sized to meet the evaluation criteria,which rely on storage reservoirs to provide fire flows. The Alrita Zone does not contain a storage reservoir. Therefore, it is deficient for fire flow. FRS3540001/Deoember 18,2001 4-20 MOVLE 4.3 Evaluation of Existing System with Buildout Development Scenario 0 The existing water system with various water main additions and recommended improvements,as shown in Plate 5,was evaluated using the CyberNET model with water demands generated from the buildout development scenario. Similar model simulation runs were made as for the existing development scenario. A summary of the computer model runs made for maximum day plus fire flow is included in Table 4-7. Complete computer printouts of selected model results are included in the Appendix. The results of the peak hourly run show that system pressures are above 35 psi in almost all city areas. Some of the same areas as identified under the existing development scenarios, such as Prefumo Canyon Road area, the northeast part of the Downtown Zone at Peach and Toro, the eastern edge.of the Bishop Street Zone, and parts of Patricia Heights, are between 25 and 35 psi during peak hourly demands. However,the Downtown Zone low pressures can be increased to 35 psi during peak hour demand and 40 psi during maximum day demand by activating the Hathaway/Montalban PRV (set at 65 psi)and the Broad/Caudill PRV (set at 67 psi). The Hathaway/Montalban Pump Station, which was previously not active, would be utilized only as a PRV station. The recommendations given in Section 4-2 and shown in Plate 5 to correct the deficiencies would also correct those seen in the buildout development scenario modeled. An evaluation was also made of the ability of existing storage facilities to meet buildout demand conditions. A summary of these evaluations is presented in Table 4-8.. A summary of the booster pump capacity under buildout conditions was prepared and is presented in Table 4-9. The Transfer Pump Station is the only pumping station that is undersized based on this criteria. Its capacity is deficient by approximately 1,000 gpm. If the Edna Saddle Pump Station(2,000 gpm) were permanently reactivated, it could provide the capacity to meet this criteria. Jl Following is a summary of the results of the computer model runs and storage requirements as given in Tables 4-7 and 4-8 for the buildout demands with the existing water system plus some proposed grid main additions as shown in Plate 5. C Maximum Day Plus Fire Flow—Deficiencies and Solutions 1. Edna Saddle Zone a. Deficiency: The ability of the Edna Saddle Zone distribution system to provide fire flows will increase by the addition of the proposed grid mains to serve the Airport Area and Margarita Area as shown in Plate 5. However,there is still a deficiency at the southwest area near Castillo Road and Pref nio Canyon Road. A 1,500-gpm fire flow can be maintained with a residual pressure above 20 psi in this residential area. However, pressures at the south ends of LaLuna and Frambuesa Roads are below 20 psi under these conditions. Also at these same points pressures are below 30 psi under maximum day demands. b. Solution: Providing a new 0.2-MG reservoir in the Prefumo Canyon area to meet required fire flow storage and operational storage requirements in the Edna Saddle Zone would increase fire flow capacities to this area to meet established criteria. FRS3540001/December 18,2001 4-21 Table 4-7 San Luis Obispo Water Master Plan O Model Results for Maximum Day Demand Plus Fire Flow Buildout System Zone Number Flow Residual Pressure and Name Location, Node No.,and Land Use m (psi) 1. Edna Saddle Los Osos Valley Road and Prefumo Cyn. Rd. 4,000 22 J-01-357(public facility, school) 3,000 37 1. Edna Saddle LOS Osos Valley Rd. &.Madonna Rd. 4,500 43 J-01-234(commercial) 1. Edna Saddle Castillo and Prefumo 1,500 24 J-01-529(SFR) 1. Edna Saddle Granada and Sueldo 4,500 18 4,000 30 J-01-143(industrial) 3,000 52 1. Edna Saddle Madonna Road and EI Mercado 4,500 61 J-01-107(commercial) 1. Edna Saddle Future E-W road 2,000' south of Tank Farm 4,500 62 Rd. &directly south of Edna Saddle Tank J-01-711 (industrial) 1. Edna Saddle Prado, south of Edna Saddle Tank 4,500 32 J-01-007 C 2. Downtown Bianchi and Higuera 4,500 63 J-02-150(industrial) 2. Downtown Marsh and Garden 4,500 32 if Broad/Caudill J-02-327(retail and office) PRV is open 2. Downtown Broad and Branch 4,500 23 J-02426(industrial) 31 if Broad/Caudill PRV is open 2. Downtown Peach and Santa Rosa(retail and office) 4,000 21, 29 if Hathaway/ Montalban& Broad/ Caudill PRVs are open 3. Terrace Hill Rosemary and Poinsettia 1,500 40 J-03-347(SFR) 3. Terrace Hill Bullock and Willow Circle 4,500 70 J-03-032(industrial/commercial) 3. Terrace Hill Bullock and McMillan 4,500 68 J-03-025 industrial/commercial 4. Foothill Foothill and Ferrini 4,500 30 J-04-026(commercial) 4. Foothill Princeton and Highland 1,500 22 J-04-041 SFR C FRS3540001 12/182001 BOYLE tables.3ft Table 4-7 San Luis Obispo Water Master Plan Model Results for Maximum Day Demand Plus Fire Flow O Buildout System Zone Number Flow Residual Pressure and Name Location, Node No., and Land Use m si 5. Res.#1 Monterey and Garfield 4,500 32 J-05-009(commercial) 5. Res.#1 Phillips and Pepper 2,500 29 J-05-052(commercial) 3,000 13 3,00018 with Calif./Monterey PRV set at 80 psi 6. Andrews Andrews and Alisal 1,500 42 J-06-013 SFR 7. Patricia Patricia and Craig 1,500 -32 J-07-012(SFR) 1,000 38 7. Patricia Patricia and Westmont 500 21 J-07-023 SFR (poor capacity) 8. Highland AI-Hil cul-de-sac(SFR) 1,500 31 J-08-010 9. Bishop Southwood and Barranca 1,500 22 J-09-021 (SFR) 9. Bishop Johnson and Bishop 3,000 36 J-09-077 and J-09-070 (hospital) 1,000 25 off 6" main 10. Slack Slack and Henderson 1,500 49 J-10-022 SFR 11. High Pressure Foothill and Carpenter 3,000 89 J-11-049 (high-density residential 12. Serrano Luneta and Hermosa 1,000 25 J-12-014 SFR 13. Ferrini Twinridge and Patricia 1,500 80 J-13-011 SFR 14. Alma Alrlta and Bahia 1,500 48 J-14-007 SFR 15. Rosemont Highland Avenue 1,500 49 J-15-010 SFR FRS35t0001 12/182001 BOYLE tablesAs (T A W N -+ 7 m 0 CD r �k- �1 TI CD (DCO ID fA U C'D 0 m = cD A.m 8 Og � m Om. n nn -IcnD 3.- 3 N 3 0) 01 O X, N 7. 7 01 3 W7 ' 7. a $ = g DC: (1) � cn �� m 'P. � a o 4a � mw mmm w � ccy33 0 m W7 _ v a AO 7u.fD N O CO N .. N» fm,,,D - Q° N O O O. O. W •+a n m o 0 Do 0 00))m m m ? m o m m oo spm � ( ma 0 3CD to N, y. m ?.= N m w O N(d� y a_ 071 Oft CD m CD N Cf . ? 7 3 N a `< W W m x CS < (Da m W m n ° 7 N CD C 0 CD % -_ •� rA CD na � O N N O' (J0 0 m m �Nm N N .01 W CA co N O1 m m -I x nna .7-. D N W A pp coAco O W O li co Oca 01 » -I 7 7 CS O � W L" O N V O�W m • C1 3 A OC y N O + a m N CD 14 3 iZ n a y » o °m gj 7 CO N CO CO N CD 7 < O V N x M m M Cr -0 Cp 7, O N V O O O CA W x m m .» Ol 01 CT V O) OCG m" 7 m W O 002 2 C m 7 m wN 01 m' 7 7 m (D O U) O < N _ y O (DD V CD A 0 10N O) W O OD A x � N O r CD O V y W to co V tD N W N Om = �= 0 G Oit{O x. Ci d 3cD1 _ CD CD ca CQ �3D 3. � � A W A m o m NCO O CD 7 O7 O W A CA CO �j CD COq x 7 m 8 C D Oin O CT w V O N W A O0m >� W Co O _CD CD 2�. m CO � �w 7 O O Cp m r2 tma p S n 01 m 0 c r A mR3 dl J J ° o D �) is is M p x 0 N W W N co Cp +01 D oc v m 0) W c0 z fC 7. Y, CD m N � n aT m C 41 < 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 +m p 3 - CD O m C w J < So m r cr M � 50 yo ° > � � -i O 3cn 3cn � cn � � 3cn r » n3 CL N D) , � ID cr � � (D � a gig o � 7 .. °—' O 0 W -� m w� COD W 4 co x CDD r d m N W 0Nm 7 i T C W N W N W 0) m (D w co 0) X .0o 0 O COD W O ONj O CD r �::N O O cc q c m CD CL N ! N �. NN w d m y CL O. a Ol V E 4W N A N iC 'y Q CAN Oe O V CD O to O oM• m m gmX momorC < m m N CD rL N N N m� O m O • 7 <OOy <. O N O 'p <. m w 3 m m� N A N m 3rn �v -nQm N �?07 3 ;am i mm $ (Dmm mm 3 _ ,voig i dCD a" CL 9) a 0 �D y - H Ol G 7 -- 7m ; _ _� pN N � d , a n O =_ m 7 O N �3 CD 7 aA .< N CD Cp W -10 N ;D 21 ' O D T1 = ?ry C -1 N L7 * _0 3 01 to �. m N N xo m m 's—' �' a m 3 3 <. °<0 C7N 3 M CL4 a ro nCD o m� am < x m of m `a �a nm c c ' m m c m D. 3 o a < Q.cL a G 3 m CD N m CD 7 _0 CD O m 3 fD ID 0) a 7 m m c 7 �. .C.,.c Q 0) m m m o m o N m a omw m y o CoA m . ��) o o:- 0 Cam 3 nm fn m e i.1nb) CD 0s Ami y{ s yn� NCD 'p .. m0m � Nm.d N dG 3 �m a aa 0 r 0 D. < c a m m 3 o N w a - M(D 3 � Baa a < O n -4 CD 3 n D �7 N n (D 3 W : 0 0.S. .. 07 < 301 N �7 S. < md. o � aD1c') " comm m ofm �' o a7 co a � N n bio 78 �b MCO o' a o a7 a, >r 7 � � CD 8cl) a7 a Nm � 7 0 3 m o e. w o m a0. N O D Nm » 7 o 3a3 qo rA �+ �o m � 9" o `�, o gym 3 � ago N o@ m $ 01 03Q= 'm � 3d' Rma mmayd cn N 3 j N OCG it 0(0 " m N m 'O CO °N 7 m —00 O. M=, Nmm CDw n � aam m . D63• m O10 .. (D O Colo Nn CD N O 3 .7.. 0 � � m 310 O � 3 13. � ' y � 0' m , 0co m �eyN}I� m 2 w � aa - On N 7, a °• Oji �.)c m m O �, N .7_., ° N �,( -t C x..7 xa m 30 7 3 3 m ° 3 °c, ° '3 ='m C � � om a c a 0 0 � a^ � d m a m m o ° �F 0 a x. m O W" o L� N n 0 A 5 p�j 0 0 OL 03 o v oma = � ��. m 7< m n am 3 m o0i m = � CD G) m 37 m P 3 3 F G7 F fro CL m a E :2 3T W U ° E 3 U fj ��p >` a G l4 m = N M > d > CL C CL U m « v m ° cE0E -o wCO— ° ' O m IL c C U m ... 0) Q 0) p ° E C �� C O 0) T � M .0 C w m ,° o y « lC ICR of ° '° TLS y :° £ ° o. ° o 0. UJ m E Cy Y oa cn ooECL mma m a ama E y o VE CL a .0 ° oc omam — E '° E o co E E o U >_ > C m aj O o CL A oa. m .r 0) m 0) r 0) N O C d m ° m a' tV0 d m r 0) 0) ° ' m C ° M r v >. e"a `' yN o f aoi °' M E ° g ' m m v N � c � u � v 'co �c � wa� dmv0cx a�iva� v E +y 3 m ma m2 my m5 0m m mm � LL "m U. m CL IDw R ° to 3 CL E Cl) m 0) c oai m ai o C n F > o CU _ U c O 3 d► U 0 c a 7 ° s IL 0 >, m m o n o .- cn o c 3 m c m 3 3 r m tN° N N O co N G y L c m 3 �. O' X N n C7 to � 0) W E m �O ; 2. Reservoir No. 1 Zone a. Deficiency: A fire flow of 2,500 gpm with a residual pressure above 20 psi can be maintained at the commercial area at Phillips and Pepper in the Reservoir No. I Zone; however, a 3,000-gpm flow results in a residual pressure of approximately 18 psi. b. Solution: Difficult to correct due to the number of 6-and 8-inch mains in this area. Would have to upsize many mains. Recommend changing the mains in the area to 10-inch size as the mains are replaced due to age and deterioration over time. 3. Patricia Zone a. Deficiency: The Patricia Zone(residential area)area near Patricia and Westmont could only sustain a 500-gpm fire flow at a residual pressure above 20 psi. b. Solution: A fire flow of 1,500 gpm can be obtained if a PRV is installed on the main in Patricia Avenue between Westmont and Clover Avenues connecting the Patricia Zone and Highland Zone. 4. Bishop Street Zone a. Deficiency: A fire flow of 3,000 gpm with a residual above 20 psi can be maintained off the 12-inch main in the Bishop Street.Zone near the hospital at Flora and Bishop but cannot be maintained from the adjacent 6-inch or 8-inch mains. A fire flow of 3,000 gp is required at the hospital. 73 b. Solution: This fire flow can be provided from the hydrants connected to the 12-inch main along Johnson or near the Bishop Pump Station. The Fire Department should test the hydrants surrounding the hospital and mark the hydrants that can deliver 3,000 gpm so the Fire Department will know which to use during a fire. If this is not satisfactory, the 12-inch main along Johnson should be connected to the hospital mains. 5. Alrita Zone a. Deficiency: A fire flow of 1,500 gpm cannot be maintained in the Alrita Zone (residential area)due to lack of storage and pumping capacity. b. Solution: The Ah-ita hydropneumatic tank and pump station should be abandoned and replaced with a new 1,600-gpm fire pump plus two duty pumps(approximately 150 gpm capacity each)for normal demands. Provide a new hydropneumatic tank with SCADA controls at the pump station. The station should be provided with either a permanent auxiliary power or a plug-in for a portable generator. As an alternative, a 200,000 gal storage tank for just this area could be constructed which would eliminate the hydropneumatic tank system. O FRS354000l/December 18,2001 4-26 NOVLE 4 O6. Serrano Zone a. Deficiency: A fire flow of only 1,000 gpm with a residual pressure above 20 psi can be maintained in the Serrano Zone (residential area) at Luneta and Hermosa. b. Solution: A fire flow of 1,500 gpm can be provided if the pipeline on Verde Avenue is used to supply the Serrano Zone,thereby looping the zone. • Storage Volume Requirements—Deficiencies and Solutions The storage volumes required to satisfy the evaluation criteria are given in Table 4-6 and 4-8. In some cases, additional storage is available from other upper storage reservoirs via pressure- reducing valves (see comments in Table 4-8). For example,Reservoir No. 3 (clearwell)and Reservoir No. 2 can supply the Edna Tank Zone via pressure-reducing valves. Figure 4-2 illustrates this concept of shared storage between major pressure zones and upper reservoirs. If the analysis is based strictly on this criteria alone, additional storage is not needed to meet the established criteria in these zones. Additional storage in other smaller zones is required as described below. In summary,the following storage reservoir changes are recommended to satisfy buildout demands and current operational criteria: 1. Edna Saddle.Zone. Maintain the upper operating levels in Edna Saddle Tank to a maximum O elevation of 344 to obtain more storage for the Edna Saddle Pressure Zone and provide a 0.20-MG storage tank with a maximum water surface elevation of 344 in the southwest part of the Edna Saddle Zone near the Prefumo Canyon area. The 0.20-MG storage tank will provide the residential fire flow volume for this zone and increase pressure under fire flow conditions in the Prefumo Canyon area. 2. Foothill and Downtown Zones. The existing 4-MG clearwell provides storage to the Downtown, Foothill, and Edna Saddle Zones directly or by gravity through pressure- reducing valves. Based on the previous analysis,a second storage reservoir is not necessary to meet the storage requirement criteria for the City distribution system. Providing a second clearwell storage reservoir for reasons stated in Section 3 should be discussed by City staff to determine if the redundancy,earthquake safety, and operational and maintenance enhancements are sufficient to warrant the expense of a new storage reservoir. 3. Terrace Hill Zone. Connect Reservoir No. 1 to the Terrace Hill Zone via a.PRV at Ella and Swazey Avenues for added storage for Terrace Hill Zone. 4. Bishop and Alrita Zones. Provide a new 1.2-MG Bishop storage tank at the same location and elevation as the Bishop Tank. Keep the Bishop Pump Station in service. Abandon the Alrita Pump Station and hydropneumatic tank and install a new pump station including a 1,600-gpm fire pump with portable or permanent auxiliary power and a larger hydropneumatic tank, or a 200,000 gal storage tank at a higher elevation to provide system O pressure. The new Bishop Tank would also serve the Terrace Hill Zone via a PRV at Southwood and Johnson Avenues if reactivated. FRS3540001/December 18,2001 427 'oxx � <5c 4:2 mrrn0 ! oxo � �rDaZ _ 6 wr �_ + D � D `= t0 a A ' m O -Zi Z \ G) rn it z 'a L m cr CA m N 0) rz•, o o=o ttrrIA ren m p N ti _> sa N m Wm �' � a rvi rvi z rv+t rrre orri _ a 0 CD � a r�*i O�rn �� w rrl Z W < W � � r, e r, o v O v c Mec z N N m -al r�*1 m CI rr+t =r.rrri Z z W Ln M-1rri 3). v rn-n v; ra D ; D * a ; ��� X�rrs ba Ca 0 CCA OD c 'V7 zv orri55 Z 19: rn z rr -E to Z G) o oN >w rri z o >rz" D -< � a < rn N r � 2.712 MGM c > o_ ;cjD O W D 1 rn C) D Z N \ O <\ G7 ` NO O Crt v Z = �t rn / r z y / CHORRO/ c) < c o / FOOTHILL -9 0 N ° MZ v PRV < nDiz ��rn D DZ OD N , Ovv \ oz D rrnc m m > t 2,55- V1G rn o HATHAWAY N o O� z MONTALBAN z m PRV rn � N (€3 PEACH ST m PRV Zyc=D ° A Z .. rrcx (7 O v m D ? m ch c o my ; r .. O p m SAN LUIS DR/ JOHNSON PRV No ; N x � GRAND/WILSON PRV M Or ; >o m r m CALIF/MONTEREY PRV N E-Ln N p m ELLA/BINNS PRV vD Z o cvmD O m — z r Z rmto -' o nZo N0 P N N OC N (lr p7 M Ul N mo �5 NO rn ox-t � — F rn C) m -9 > m < f < G) c � m v � � N 5. Slack Street Zone. Increase the McCollom Pump Station capacity to 1,600 gpm to provide C' fire flow with auxiliary power or a plug-in for a portable generator. 6. Rosemont, Highland,and Ferrini Zones. Abandon the Highland Tank and provide 1.600-gpm fire booster pump with permanent auxiliary power or a plug-in for a portable generator at a new Rosemont Pump Station. Provide two PRV stations, one at the existing Skyline/Mira Sol PRV and one at the existing Patricia PRV station to allow flows to the Highland Zone. This will benefit both the Highland and Patricia Zones. 7. Serrano and Patricia Zones. Provide 0.4 MG additional storage to the Serrano Zone, which will also benefit the Patricia Zone. As an option, add a 1,600-gpm fire booster pump with auxiliary power or a plug-in for a portable generator. 4.5 Pump Station Evaluation The results of site assessments of each of the City's booster pump stations, including data sheets, photographs,and recommendations,are presented in the Appendix. Following is a summary of the recommendations for each of the pump stations. A further description of their capacity, discharge HGL, number of pumps, and the receiving pressure zones is given in previous Table 2-2. 1. Fel Mar PumD Station. Abandon Highland Tank due to age and condition. Keep this pump station and utilize it only until the new Rosemont Pump Station is built and the Highland Tank is abandoned. Supply to the Highland Zone would be provided from the Ferrini Pump Station via O the new Skyline/Mira Sol PRV and the Patricia PRV. It would also be provided by a PRV bypass at the proposed new Rosemont Pump Station. 2. Bressi Pump Station. Replace pumps in the next 3 years due to leaky packing and age. Provide phone line connection between Serrano Tank and Bressi Pump Station. Provide automatic dialer alarm or SCADA system to alert operators of pump failure and to better regulate pumps with tank levels. Equip with 1,600-gpm fire booster pump with auxiliary power or provide additional storage at Serrano Tank. Provide flow meters and pressure gauges at new pumps. 3. Transfer Pump Station. Replace pumps within the next 7 years due to leaky packing and age. Increase pumping capacity by approximately 1,000 gpm that this time to met criteria for meeting maximum day demand and refilling fire and operational storage within five days at buildout demands. Provide new meters on pumps,pressure gauges, and SCADA connections to Reservoir Nos. 2 and 3 and the treatment plant. Provide surge protection, if necessary, due to higher pumping capacity. 4. McCollum Pump Station. Provide automatic dialer alarm or SCADA connection to alert operators of pump failure. Replace flow meter in vault. Equip with 1,600-gpm fire booster pump with permanent auxiliary power or plug-in for portable generator or provide additional storage at Slack Street Tank. 5. Ferrini Pump Station. Add a 1,600-gpm fire pump and auxiliary power to this pump station. Install meters and a SCADA system to Ferrini Tank. O 6. Alrita Hydropneumatic Pump Station. Abandon this pump station due to age and condition. Build a new pump station with two 150-gpm duty pumps and a 1,600-gpm fire pump with FRS3540001/December 18,2001 4-29 F3OYLB auxiliary power. Provide a larger hydropneumatic tank with SCADA controls. As an altemativP3 to the hydropneumatic tank, consider installation of a 0.20-MG elevated storage tank. 7. Rosemont Pump Station. Rebuild pump station with two 150-gpm pumps plus a 1,600-gpm fire pump with auxiliary power. Provide meters on pumps and a SCADA system to control pump based.on Rosemont Tank levels and for data collection and reporting. Provide a PRV at the pump station to allow flow from the Rosemont Tank back to Highland Zone during low pressures in Highland Zone such as from a fire demand. 8. Bishop Pump Station. Replace pumps as needed due to age and condition. Provide meters on pumps and a SCADA system to control pumps based on Bishop Tank levels and for data collection and reporting. 9. Edna Saddle Pump Station. Maintain this pump station as a backup for Terrace Hill Zone until the Transfer Pump Station is enlarged. 10. Foothill Pump Station. Abandon/demolish pump station. 4.6 Recommended Operational Changes Based on the results of the modeling of the existing water system,the following operational changes are recommended to improve pressure distribution, system redundancy, water circulation, emergency and fire flow storage, and overall system operation and monitoring. • Install improvements including new pumps, buildings, SCADA systems, flow meters, and pressure gauges on booster pump stations as indicated in Section 4.5. • Activate the Hathaway/Montalban and the Broad/Caudill pressure-reducing stations to provide redundant supply to the Downtown Zone. (This was implemented by City staff in 1999.) • Provide a PRV at the northern end of the Patricia Zone at Patricia Avenue between Westmont and Clover Avenues to allow flows from the Highland Zone during fire flow demands. • Use Verde Avenue pipeline south of Luneta Avenue to supply Serrano Tank Zone to increase pressure/supply by providing a looped pipeline. • Raise operating levels in reservoirs that are structurally sound to take advantage of unused volumes to meet operational, emergency, and fire storage requirements. These levels would be approximately 1 to 2 feet below the overflow elevations as given in Table 2-10. The resulting volumes are given in Table 4-8. • Provide additional storage as recommended in Section 4.4 as follows: - City staff to determine if and when a new clearwell at the treatment plant site is warranted for the reasons discussed in Section 3. - Provide a new 1.2-MG Bishop Tank at the same location and elevation. The existing Bishop Tank would be abandoned. Construct a new Alrita Pump Station including a fire.pump, auxiliary power, and hydropneumatic tank(or a 0.2-MG elevated tank). FRS3540001/December 18,2001 ' 430 �o�L� O - Provide additional 0.2-MG storage at Edna Saddle Zone. Locate new Edna Saddle Zone tank in the southwest part of the city near Prefumo Canyon and connect to 16-inch main in Los Osos Valley Road with 12-inch main. A more costly alternative, as discussed in Section 5, would be to connect this zone to the Foothill Zone via a 16,000-foot-long, 12-inch-diameter main along Foothill Boulevard to Los Osos Valley Road. A pressure-reducing valve would be necessary to regulate the pressure differences between zones. Provide additional storage to serve the Serrano, Patricia, Rosemont, Highland, Ferrini, and Slack Street Zones (or upgrade McCollum pump station with auxiliary power to serve the Slack Street Zone or the Bressi Pump Station to serve the Serrano Zone or the Ferrini Pump Station to serve the Ferrini,Highland, Patricia,and Rosemont Zones). Details of these recommendations are discussed in the previous section. • Provide a PRV connection from Reservoir No. 1 Zone to Terrace Hill Zone,Ella and Swazey Avenues to take advantage of extra storage available in Reservoir No. 1. • Reverse the Patricia PRV at Patricia and Patricia Court to flow from Ferrini to Highland Zone. • Install a 10-inch main from Wavertree Avenue across the railroad tracks to Poinsettia Avenue. This is not a requirement due to pressure problems, but it would improve circulation and provide redundancy and looping of the mains in this area. o Install grid mains for future city growth as shown in Plate 5 as development occurs. Exact Clocations can very somewhat depending on new street locations. 4.7 Service to Airport Area The expansion area known as the Airport Area is located at the southern portion of San Luis Obispo as shown in Plate 5 and contains approximately 1,100 acres based on the General Plan. This area includes the existing municipal airport at the southeast corner. This area is planned to be developed in accordance with the General Plan land use designations as shown in Plate 2 and Figure 1-2. Minor modifications to land uses and roadway patterns will likely be made in accordance with the final Specific Plan;however,these modifications are not expected to generate water demands greater than considered in this study. Therefore,the water demands of this study are considered to be conservative. The land uses planned for this area and the acreages of each are as follows: • Business Park: 64 acres • Low-Density Residential: 7 acres • Open Space: 5 acres • Public Facility: 348 acres • Recreation: 279 acres • Service Manufacturing: 480 acres s Tourist: 17 acres OThe water system expansion necessary to provide service to this area is shown in Plate 5. Based on the existing topography of the area and its location, it can be served by the existing Edna Saddle Pressure FRS3540001/December 18,2001 431 NOWE o Zone No. 1. The primary water service to this pressure zone is from a 20-inch-diameter transmission main that brings water from Reservoir Nos. 2 and 3 located to the north of the city. A 16-inch pressure reducing valve located at Madonna and Higuera provides pressure regulation to the Edna Saddle Zone and allows filling of the Edna Saddle Tank,which is located to the north of the Margarita and Airport expansion areas (Plate 5). The 4-MG Edna Saddle Tank provides operational. emergency, and fire flow storage for the area and can also serve the Terrace Hill Zone to the east by means of the Edna Saddle Pump Station. The Edna Saddle Zone also provides water to the municipal airport area via a metered service to the private water system. The Airport Area expansion area is shown to be served by 12-inch-diameter grid mains—two traversing east-west, which are generally connected at the Los Osos Valley Road alignment and the Tank Farm Road alignment, and three north-south connecting to the existing 16-inch and 20-inch transmission mains to the north. The exact locations of these mains will likely change somewhat to follow future planned roadways, but their general configuration should remain similar to that shown. These grid mains are necessary to allow the transport of water within and across the area to supply fire flows up to 4,000 gpm in planned industrial areas. The interior distribution mains should be sized based on the final land use designation and related fire flow demands as discussed in Section 1 of this report. These pipes will likely range between 8 and 10 inches,depending on fire flow demands and the looping configuration. The computer model prepared for this Master Plan should be used to verify pipe size and location prior to final water system design. 4.7.1 Water System Impacts by Airport Area Development The impacts to the existing water system from development and buildout of the Airport Area are summarized as follows: 1. The average daily water demand for the Airport Area at buildout, based on land use designations and water demand factors in Table 2-8, is approximately 1,234 gpm(1.8 MGD), which excludes the existing municipal airport demands. The maximum daily water demand is estimated at 2,468 gpm(3.6 MGD). (The Margarita.Area is estimated to have an average daily demand of 260 gpm.) This average daily demand for the Airport Area is compared to a city-wide increase from 4,906 gpm(7.1 MGD)at present to 6,950 gpm(10.0 MGD)at buildout of the entire General Plan area. This equates to approximately 60 percent of the increase in demand being due to the Airport.Area. Approximately 13 percent of the increase in demand would be due to the Margarita area and the remaining 27 percent due to growth in other parts of the city. 2. The distribution system shown in Plate 5 within the Airport Area and extending into the Margarita Area to connect to existing mains and around the municipal airport area are necessary to serve this area. This amounts to approximately 400 feet of 16-inch(just south of the Edna Saddle Tank),46,700 feet of 12-inch, and 2,250 feet of 10-inch main, which also contain fire hydrants, services,valves, and appurtenances. The smaller distribution mains and appurtenances between these mains are also required but are normally installed as development occurs.. If portions of the Airport Area remain as "Open Space" per the adopted Specific Plan,the distribution mains so identified in Plate 5 would not be required (approximately 5,800 feet of 12-inch main). 3. As previously discussed in this section, a 0.2-MG reservoir is recommended for the Edna Sadd'� Zone to be located in the southwest part of the city near the Prefumo Canyon area. This tank FRS3540001/December 18,2001 4-32 NOVL.E would increase fire flows in this immediate area and provide fire and operational storage for the v Airport Area and Margarita area in conjunction with the Edna Saddle Tank. Should the Edna Saddle Tank ever be taken out of service for inspection and/or repair, it would also provide temporary service to the entire Edna Saddle Zone. The estimated Airport Area average day water demand (1,234 gpm) comprises approximately 78 percent of the increase over the present demand of the Edna Saddle Zone at full buildout(1,600 gpm total average day demand increase). The estimated Margarita area average day water demand(260 gpm)comprises approximately 16 percent of the increase over the present demand of the Edna Saddle Zone at full buildout. 4. The extension of a grid main surrounding the existing municipal airport is shown in Plate 5. Because this is currently a private water system, internal distribution main extensions were not sized or modeled. The impact and cost of these mains should be determined when the area surrounding the municipal airport develops. C O FRS354000l/December is,2001 4-33 RO4�LE 0 Section 5 Capital Improvement Program 5.1 Capital Cost Estimates The estimated capital costs of the proposed improvements recommended in Sections 4.2 through 4.6 to improve pressure distribution, system redundancy,water circulation, emergency and fire flow storage, and overall system operation and monitoring for the existing level of development are estimated in Table 5-1. These costs are budgetary opinions of probable cost and were estimated based on the cost estimating factors given in Table 5-2 using 1998 dollars. The priority of these recommended improvements are somewhat subjective and may vary somewhat due to budgeting, construction scheduling, and City preferences. Estimated capital costs for the additional improvements required to satisfy buildout conditions are given in Table 5-3. The overall timing of these improvements will vary based on the scheduling of improvements as the land development occurs. The costs given for the grid mains shown in Plate 5 do not include the distribution mains (6-, 8-,or 10-inch)within the individual subdivisions, industrial areas, or commercial developments planned. These distribution mains should be sized according to the actual type of land use (water demand or fire flow) as it is submitted for final development. The computer model provided with this Master Plan should be used to verify these distribution main sizes. It is assumed that the costs for these distribution mains will be passed on directly to the developer/user based on actual total costs to the City including all water system appurtenances, increased supply capacity, etc. The grid mains shown in Plate 5 are adequately sized to provide fire flows and to meet demands based on the land uses given in the current General Plan. The estimated capital costs for the water treatment plant improvements, as described in Section 3,are presented in Table 5-5. These recommended improvements are subdivided into three phases and prioritized as shown. The order of these improvements are somewhat subjective and are subject to change based on City review, budget constraints, cost versus overall benefit to customers, safety issues, and similar considerations. The estimated impacts to the City's water supply and distribution system from the proposed Airport Area expansion are discussed in Section 4.7. The capital costs associated with these impacts are presented in Table 5-6. The impacts and costs to add approximately 4 MGD capacity to the treatment facilities to meet the maximum daily demand for this area consist of many components such as raw water supply and storage,treatment costs,plant expansion costs, etc. The improvements recommended in Table 5-5 would serve to increase the treatment plant capacity,upgrade the plant to conform to existing or expected future regulations, and to repair aging equipment and facilities. The final water supply and treatment cost allocation to the Airport Area,which comprises approximately 18 percent of the total future city-wide demand at buildout, should be determined by City officials based on the many factors associated with providing for city growth. FRS3540001/December 18,2001 5-1 f3®4�LE Table 5-1 San Luis Obispo Water Master Plan O Budgetary Capital Costs for Existing System Recommended Distribution System Improvements Cost PrIoritV Description $ 1 Activate existing Hathaway/Montalban and Broad/Caudill pressure reducing valves. 0 2 Provide PRV at the northern end of Patricia Zone to provide flows from Highland Zone 30,000 during fire flow demands. 3 Reverse PRV at Patricia and Patricia Court to flow from Ferrini to Highland Zone. 5,000 4 Provide a PRV connection from Res.#1 Zone to Terrace Hill Zone. 30,000 5 Upgrade 6-inch pipes to 8-inch in Highland Zone per Plate 5. 100,000 6 Utilize Venae Avenue pipeline south of Luneta to supply Serrano Tank Zone to increase 25,000 pressurelsupply. 7 Pump Station Improvements per Section 4.5 a. Fel Mar PS phase out 5,000 b. Bressi PS, replace 2 pumps, add fire pump with aux. power and SCADA system 300,000 c. Transfer PS, replace 3 pumps within 7 years and add SCADA system 125,000 d. McCollum PS, add fire pump with auxiliary power and SCADA system. 200,000 e. Ferrini PS, add meters, SCADA system,fire pump, and auxiliary power 100,000 f. Rosemont PS, new pump station with fire pump w/aux. power and SCADA system 400,000 g. Bishop PS, replace pumps and new SCADA system 100,000 h. Alrita PS, new pumps with fire pump with auxiliary power, hydrotank, and 400,000 SCADA system(alternate 0.2-MG tank and pumps$427,000) i. Abandon Foothill Pump Station 5,000 8 Provide 0.2-MG storage tank with 12"main to Los Osos Valley Road in Prefumo Canyon 203,000 area to improve fire flow capacity. (Alternative 12" main from Foothill to Los Osos Valley Road plus PRV station. 16,000'at$150/ft=approx. $2.5 million) 9 Provide 1.2-MG storage tank in Bishop Zone to serve Bishop Zone. 1,250,000 10 Install a 10" main from Wavertree Avenue across railroad tracks to Poinsettia Ave. 75,000 (optional) Total 3,353,000 'This table does not include costs from the Whale Rock Transmission Main Vulnerability Assessment, Cayucos to San Luis Obispo, California, Fugro West, March 1997. 0 FRS35d0001 1211=001 BOYLE tables.xls 5-2 o Table 5-2 San Luis Obispo Water Master Plan Cost Estimating Factors Water System Improvements' J Costs for new pipeline improvements in undeveloped areas such as Airport and Mar arita areas Description Unit 84nch 104nch 124nch 164nch Trenching, Backfilling and Compacting $/LF 7 8 9 11 Bedding $/LF 4 5 6 7 Pi $/LF 20 25 30 35 Resurfacing and Traffic Control $/LF 5 6 7 8 Subtotal $/LF 36 44 52 61 Main Tee and Fire Hydrant Assembly $/EA 2,900 3,200 3,400 4,200 Water Service $/EA 500 600 700 800 Gate Valve and Valve Box $/EA 1,000 1,300 1,700 8,500 Cross or Tee $/EA 800 1,350 1,760 3,500 Connection to Main $IEA 2,500 2,500 2,500 3,000 Subtotal Cost @ 1,320 1-1:72 67,520 80,830 93,840 1 125,220 Engineering, Planning, Design, Ins ectior' 20%4 13,504 16,166 18,768 25,044 Incidental Allowances 10%4 6,752 8,083 9,384 12,522 Environmental Allowance6 5%4 3,376 4,042 4,692 6,261 Subtotal Cost @ 1,320 LF 91,152 109,121 126,684 169,047 ContingencyAllowance" 10% 9,115 10,912 12,668 16,905 Total Cost 1,320 LF 100,267 120,033 139,352 185,952 Total Cost/LF 76 91 106 141 Cost for new i eline improvements in developed areas IlDescription I Unit I 84nch I 16-inch I 12-inch I 164nch Costs Provided by Ci $/LF 100 110 120 1 150 Costs for other improvements Description Unit Cost Factor Storage Tank 7 1060 gal $700 to 2 MG $500>2 MG Booster Pump Station m $140 Standby Emergency Generator' kw $230 Right-of-Way/Land Acquisition10 acre $35,000 sq.ft. $0.80 Engineering Allowance3 20%4 Incidental Allowance10%4 Environmental Processing Allowance6 5%4 Contingency Allowance" 10% Capital Recovery Factor'2 8%,30 yr 0.08883 Power Cost kWh $0.10 Personnel Cost hourly $35 'Cost factors are in 1998 dollars(ENR-CCI-LA=6,660) 2Includes the cost of two isolation valves, one tee, three fire hydrants,two main connections, and seven water services per quarter mile(1,320 LF). 3Engineering cost,which may include predesign report, geotechnical, survey, final design, bidding, materials FRS3540001 12/182001 BOYLE tables.xls Table 5-2 San Luis Obispo Water Master Plan o Cost Estimating Factors Water System Improvements' testing, and inspection. `Factor is applied to total estimated construction costs. Slncidental costs include legal, bond financing, and City project administration costs. 6Environmental processing and permitting costs. 7Storage tank cost factor includes foundation, site grading, and landscaping. BPump station cost factor includes pumps, piping, site grading, electrical and instrumentation. 9Standby emergency generator cost includes diesel engine/generator set, 1,000 gal.fuel tank, concrete pad, and enclosure. 701ncludes costs for purchase of pipeline right-of-way, and tank sites. "Factor is applied to the total of estimated construction, engineering, incidental, and environmental processing costs. 12 For use in economic comparison of alternatives. 0 0 FRS3540001 12/16/2001 BOYLE tom.)ds Table 5- San Luis Obispo Water Master Plan Capital Costs for Buildout System Recommended Distribution System Improvements Cost Priority Description S 1 Grid main improvements' in Edna Saddle Pressure Zone 7,405,000 No. 1. 2 Grid main improvements' in Downtown Pressure Zone No. 1,031,000 2. 3 Grid main improvements' in Terrace Hill Pressure Zone 989,000 No. 3. 4 Grid main improvements' in Alrita Pressure Zone No. 14. 23,000 Total 9,448,0002 'See Table 5-4 for summary of costs for new grid mains required at buildout. Grid mains are not shown in order of priority. Priority will be based on actual city growth.. 2These costs do not include recommendations from the Whale Rock Transmission Main Vulnerability Assessment, Cayucos to San Luis Obispo, California, Fugro West, March 1997. J These costs also do not include normal waterline, pump station, water system, and reservoir replacement and/or maintenance costs due to age. FRS354000112/18n001 tables.)ds 5 5 BOYLE CO mCOOOOO � COO OCO W QCOCOOOOQ � OCON NCOOQOm00 W � M Co Q CD ONOW � W WMW � OnONQaONMMNMn � m M Cn W J OMNI W � Qn QO CD ON O � N •- M NCD W IN 0n nM W � } � rz d W d Ld vig W r.�iiN N fO tO O I,� Lo C70aa (O LO— Lc) d UCOCD W OCOCONCO niD Q W W � � QQ � nQQfO num Wt0 W �0 0 `J N r- M N N N m J OCOt0OOO '.. 000DCOCOCOmOOO �. mCOOt000OCOCOCOCO M Ra a aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaatLCL aaaa c R CL y � a O N N N N N N O O N N N N NN N N N N O O N N N N N N N N N N G � � O m ` a m c a A a U. . a R J O O to Q M CO l0 N l0 M N M n CC LCO � CDMQ0 co W corMQCo W MOMQ `' 10N W N •- W QtOMM m 3 y W nOpt+) npOW tnMOMnmOCOON IN � MC'7 �IN W 0 CO •R+ y 97.4 O W CD n 10 CO W CO W W m C N � •- � � � �- N CV � � � N N.- R y m C c R E c C> O � NMQtO CD nto WO � NMQtO (D nto W O � NM mm W OvN Ly m3 m W i- 1 � r N O N N N N N N N N M M M M I, M M M Q QQ E RnnnnnnnnnnntDnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn £ J126Ll ` R r r r T r r r r r f r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r yam °' o00000000000000000000000000000o c O £ aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa 0 c = e z R oO CL N � m. a c O C O = 0 o 0 0 r U LL CC - R C V NC N m m O1 C Q O w Y O O O •O m 1p w R CC 1p Z E c _ _ _ Z 3 > O t 3 Ern LLy ti ~ U. 0 0 0 0b c y 0 0 .R.. 0 C O Y H C NCD N 3 C C p = c R .L.. CL C C R 08 O R Ca mCn YR � N � NN W C O p'O m R J N OQa a R UU N = Ir O CA U m � M0 R = CO0ai COW. X IT MR �o = L N O p V OQOO COCCCCCooO O O O H ORRRRRCjcNHOCW .W Cc 'Cc 0ORO LLLymm y0 C r r 'C O O y m N = 0bJJ 9 "' Z O O O V Y O. W IJ N w O m R a'. 7 tl) C C C 7 V O « CA COO 0 0 7 7 7 7 7 L0 0 0 0 V Ci J CC m 70 y O 0003: OCO CO MCA CO S .. ... 73 Rar CON000 D] CD R CAComX QCD .. �0 = w .r- .� .� .� 2 m p ' O V Ln 0 0 t0 0 Z Z Z •` •� C'O R C7 O O O O O R R R m O L � ZZ � N � L O O 3 pLLLLL 7LL N a_ w C Z C ID VCC R CC m N £ R R R y CC 0 y 7 7 7 7 0 € CC r g O Q O R R R R R O O O R O 0 0 0 m o c 7 �oao, LL LL LL c c LL LL m m LL LL L n 3 u� m �i �i �i � � c c c R 0 ao O Y Y O O Y Y Y -O b b O O O Ae N 0 0 0 E a r v 3 3 c c c �D �D c c 3 p p c c c c b o 0 0 0 o c o 0 0 O l4 R o m R R R CO CD R R tJ CO CO R R R 000000 R R CO N m JUmZZCnCAC) NNHI- ZZZNN1- f- P !f w � - U � w pop C s s • s s • a • • i s « ♦ • a « « ♦ a a a s • • p nNMQlO CO naoW O � Nim Q �CY CpnCO W ONMQt0 COn00 W O � y rzi o fl nNyD LC .° 0 NCO Nttm � OmmmOOCDNmNN � n � OmOOOOMN � QNN � N J � �, MLA p) nOOmO) ONO) � LOOMmCD RI�� �- 'G Co- } mmmnNmO � CO % NNd i MMQ 0- m-�-0)- N n O to M0 CO to tom U V mmmN V OMnmNN 'Q - m V � � 0 •- m0 Mm OnM SCO 00 N M M CO) It r r A �+ r J m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m �- m m m 0 0 0 0 C m m m m m m m O O o o o 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 R v O O O N N N N O O O O O O O O r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r � � N Ow Ta 0 O E e6 3 L `U` U `U` U`` `U` U `U` ``U `U` `U` U `U` `U` `U` `U` `U` `U` `U` `U` U `U` `U` U U `U` `U` w UU` `U` U `U` U `U` U « / I I / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / > / / / / / / Loaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaan. aa c La a 0 ` N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N m m N N N N N N N N Cl N N N N N O m v 1 FITI. . . . . . . . . . . .O c 4.1 m .3 -0 a U. d 1 a J 0 L n V0Mvv � m rnvrn CD m s n m N m V O � m m CO O M n IV N N S' n O N M O n m O N N O � N 0 A m 3 .+ MNMMMCM0cn . coca OnmO) OONnOtO oNO � oQQ cQ im ccmmm - Q LOMnm - - Mr M m - CD . r .- .- r N N •- N C'7 " � t J m c 0 O CS m � mM � Omn 000) O � NOmnE00) O � M � NOO � RMN CO C) ONM 3: 0 a � � cvvc � �O �O �O �n �O �OiO �Ommnnoo .- r .- � � �O �Ommmmc$ onnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnaocoaooDaoaom nnnnnnn C O > y J J F y O_ m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IE0 - aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaa m IA c _ Jea I'M (A ` y a0i y 0 o0+ o C y o o o o O Lon v 30 (� Q C ' o 00 0 ° ;5 , 00y L3 b 0 W J 0T ; J C) O Z U " m O 0 0 L « « L V; p o� w « y 0 7 0 0 3 0 m L N y y N t y r O C C y L 3 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 p L .2 .2 g 7O O M M O C m O O y c C C c 0 N O J. O. = y 00 E E. ,O c W m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ` O O 0 (� Cl)Ozz a a C r O m � . « O O •O '0 '0 '0 O 0 .. C y L6 L6 lC E3 O J y = d OJ N N O C N 4) cl CL o O Q _ = O -0 CE .. o y o `0 3 0 3 U U = y N -0 -0 w O N a o O N J O o o - w > y > 3 w 0 w O O O O .� 'O L~I) « .. r ,� ,� .� N C L6 tE � Q Q 0 y y V O y O W N y 0 0 0 0 3 0 fn fn N N Z O O Ly0 C S m N L 0 y 0 y y y z 2 O N ... .+ r L S , , m y J m m La o y t m 3 c y y y O m W W m « « 4) N = 0 3 3 C 0 O .0C L L L 0 O O O � O 3 3 >S N +:' '0 '0 W Z Z ao, D Oo m d O N 0 0 O c +•� 'S 'S L «. 00 Lri W W '0 'O •O N y W 0 0 _ O C 'C y 0 0 0 0 3 l6 y 0) 0 � O O O O y •�- •.- o a m 0 0 .: y m m m � � N O E7 0 0 0 0 0 0 LL m otS y 3 N O O O p y y to y O d y W E E E E m a' It N G) _ C y L O O L L W «. YY ca O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 a a LC CS p y p y C 0 0 4) 3 0 c O O p 0 3 3 7 N co, p N N CD O O O y C). i L 0 0 N Q) D) W :) ,:3 y 0 0 0 0 JO) ZNN � � LnCD (D 7aaaaaa (nNZZZlnmmm ra � fntntn - m -ON CM7 M M Ct m M Q Q NV I C Q IT Q R t00 � n � COD LN L l0 L i0 L 7 LL y a Z R OOO O CO CDN O O O O O (0 (DO 00 J O N O 10 n O n co Q O O N LO N CO O O O CO N n 0 n a 10 ) D W } 0) 1D V- n LO CD N 0010) N M Cb CC1 N CV W � O co co N 17 CV N 0) n n CO A N N CC N N O r N 1'i It m 0 J000 C WW (00000 aCD 000 C N N N O O O O N N N N N O G O yI I lo w +O+ p i V V V � V t> UUUC.� UUUUCAU O 1�4)oaaa aaaaaaaaaaa ay C (a a N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 'O � � 0 m ` m C o. LL L �y 3 +=+ NQ V CMO V NC00_ VC00 � 0 N n N r 174 cl nnN N CO ANN N Q' L J r m C 0 w Ama mr N0) ONCOVn L0 C) O 3: m 00 R � CpnCO 00 � � " � rrnrn 0 � nnn nnnnnnnnpi- n n I I ca CL 2 CC CI ~ p C4) 0 0000 00000 0 0 0 0 0 o EQ aadli aliadliddddli d J � m Ca � O � Y a O w R L E c ai M v a a) CL mCC cn Q � 0 � �a O J L O Cl! N w 100 J J ar LL LL LL N O a J O C C C C a Q r map f- f- f- 0 O L C N 0 0 0 5 H w U m m 0 m m y m c 3 3 0 = ,c = L 0 � � 10LLL p 70 C V OLnmFrrr .r NCOO f0 "p C C C t0 CA v) ~ Q t6 � « Y � � L000 N f6 lC a mats df O 0000 o c CC 3 a� u CC CNm 'V � � l0 L Lco G c N N 1+ S: zi 27 LL c = O a OO on O t0 CO CO Cj _5 wi000000f- tntn LL go CA O 0 CO Cn0 cot00 tO r y �O LO CO CO CO to co� a, s Z LL : C Table 5fi San Luis Obispo Water Master Plan Water Treatment Plant i Capital and Study Costs for Recommended Improvements V Cost Priority Description $ Phase I 1 Evaluate risk and determine recommended improvements to protect the 25,000 water treatment plant from potential train derailment. 1 Perform seismic evaluation of the existing treated water storage 25,000 reservoir dear well and Washwater Reservoir No. 1 to determine effective storage volumes. 2 Perform CT tracer study of dear well for emergency disinfection CT 25,000 compliance utilizing hypochlorite disinfection. Phase 1 Subtotal 751000 Phase II 2 Add 4-MG clearwell' 2,900,000 1 Add second sedimentation basin. 1,300,000 1 Recoat interior of existing clearwell once new clearwell is online. 350,000 2 Modify standby power to operate the treatment plant during power 15,000" outages for emergency operation. 80,000 3 Add flow meter to ozone cooling system discharge line to monitor flow to 10,000 the filters. Consider future modification to ozone cooling water system to 125,000 incorporate dosed loop and cooling tower. 3 Consider modifications to protect the water treatment plant from potential TBD train derailment. To be determined in Phase I study. 3 Consider control modifications to maintain constant filtration rates during 20,000 backwashing by reducing plant hydraulic loading. 4 Add one new drying bed including underdrain system if enhanced 50,000 coagulation is mandated. 1 Install a security fence around the forebay to protect water supply (completed). 0 3 Repair expansion joints in the forebay. 25,000 3 Provide new ladder in forebay. 5,000 2 Modify washwater inlet control structure to facilitate effective use of 140,000 reclamation basin including motor operators and controls for valves. Phase II Subtotall 5,020,000 'The additional 4-MG clearwell is recommended for City consideration based on the vulnerability of the existing 4-MG dearwell to earthquake hazard and the need for redundancy if the existing clearwell is taken out of service for repair. 'Represents estimated study cost. FRS3540001 12/1&2001 BOYLE ta�.ids Table 5-5 San Luis Obispo Water Master Plan O Water Treatment Plant Capital and Study Costs for Recommended Improvements Cost Prioritv Description S Phase III 2 Provide level monitoring at forebay. 25,000 1 Modify the existing sedimentation basin drive to facilitate addition of a 50,000 brush system on the drive mechanism. 2 Replace open drip-proof motors on the pumps with high-efficiency 75,000 motors, which are enclosed and fan cooled. 3 Recommend coating the black hypochlorite storage tanks with a white 5,000 aint system to reduce temperature-induced decay. Phase 111 Subtotal 155,000 Project Total 5,250,000 O O FRS3sa0001 12/18/2001 BOYLE tables.xis Table 5-6 San Luis Obispo Water Master Plan Capital Costs for Expansion of Water System to Serve the Proposed Airport Area at Buildout Cost Priority Description $ 1 Proposed grid main improvements'to serve the Airport Area as 5,551,000 shown in Plate 5 4 Portion (18%)2 of water supply and treatment plant upgrades and 945,000 expansion in Table 5-5 including additional 4-MG storage tank (clearwell) Total 6,496,000 7 'Includes pipe sections within the Margarita Area necessary to connect to existing grid mains and new mains surrounding the municipal airport. =This percentage is based on average day demand for Airport Area at buildout(1,234 gpm)in relation to the city-wide average day demand (6,950 gpm)at buildout. FRS35d0001 12/182001 tabWs.ids 5-11 BOYLE C5.2 Improvements for Further Study Following is a list of potential improvements or studies that appear to be beneficial to the overall operation of the water distribution system. • Expand the existing telemetry system to provide a city-wide SCADA system to monitor and operate the booster pump stations, selected pressure-reducing valves, and reservoirs in conjunction with the treatment plant. This will allow more turnover in the tanks to better maintain chlorine residual. This would also provide the operators with better records of pump operation, flows, and daily tank water level fluctuations. • Perform an energy audit of treatment plant processes, including Transfer Pump Station,to determine the actual costs of electrical energy used and impact of running plant only during off-peak energy rate periods. • Perform individual reservoir siting studies for tanks recommended in Section 4. These studies would include evaluation of specific land parcels, seismic considerations,hydraulic operation and monitoring, chlorine residual maintenance,possible chlorine booster stations, access roads, environmental studies, landscaping, aesthetics,and refined construction cost estimates. • Prepare predesign reports for pump station and PRV station improvements recommended in Section 4. O O FRS3540001/December 18,2001 5-12 MOVLE Section 6 Remote Registration Systems for City Water Meters 6.1 Purpose The purpose of this section of the Water System Master Plan is to describe in general the various types and operation of a remote registration system for City water meters. It also provides general guidance to the City with regard to consideration of transition to a remote registration system of some type. Case study examples of other communities who have made the change to these types of systems are also described. 6.2 Hierarchy of Meter Reading Technology Various technologies are available to cities and communities for meter reading; including remote meter reading. Following is a general description of the technologies available from the most basic to the most advanced. • Basic Read/Bill Cycle. The meter reader manually reads the meters by viewing the registers and logging the results in a route book. The logbook is given to a clerk.who than calculates the consumption and manually prepares a bill for mailing. An option to this method to improve efficiency is to computerize the billing process. • Handheld Computers. Handheld computers are used as an electronic route book. It prompts the reader to follow a particular route utilizing a keyboard entry system. Some features of a handheld computer are: - Route searching yields address, sequences, or notes. - High or low checking yields an alarm when the reading may indicate a faulty meter or a leak. - Notes can be added, such as meters needing to be serviced. - New meters can be added if found along the route. - Time and date stamping is done for better records and personnel relations. - Statistics can be displayed, such as number of meters read or yet to be read. A desktop PC can also be used to upload and download information with the handheld computer. This allows easier billings and convenient reporting to management for analysis. This can be done unattended and after hours to save costs and overtime. • Remote Metering. This improvement to the visual reading step allows meter readings that would.otherwise be inaccessible. Dirt, locked gates, submerged vaults, basements, etc.,which FRS3540001/December 18,2001 6-1 P30VLE O could hamper the field readings are overcome with a remote system. There are generally three types: the generator remote,the encoder remote,and the hybrids. - The generator remote uses the flow of water passing through a meter to drive a coil in the register,thus generating a pulse of electricity. The electricity is transmitted to a remote odometer, which turns the number wheels. This system allows for installations up to 1,000 feet away from the meter but relies on a wire between the meter and the remote odometer. - The encoder remote contains digital circuitry that allows the register to "read itself." It is read remotely with a reading device or"interrogator." Encoders can provide identification numbers for each meter. - The hybrid remote combines features of the generator remote and encoders. Most often, it sends a switch closure for a given volume of water to an accumulator. Reads can be made from between 500 and 1;500 feet away. • Automatic Data Capture. Automatic data capture refers to the reading of meters with a handheld computer that automatically reads and stores the data. The remote for an encoder may be a button or a pin jack type of receptacle. The handheld computer has an attachment that fits into or onto the receptacle. The reading is transmitted as the-attachment is inserted into the receptacle and stored with the identification number. There are many other features available with this system including autosearch,which matches the meter reading identification up to the Oaccount address. • Radio Frequency. A variation of the data capture method is utilizing a radio frequency transmission. The meter reader will have a handheld computer, which will receive transmission from meters and store all of the data. Reading can be performed with equipment located in a vehicle as it drives through the area. Currently,this method is utilized on a limited basis in the water industry. • Automatic Meter Reading(AMR). This method utilizes an automatic transmission of data over telephone, cable television,or other means. Personnel dedicated to the task of meter reading are virtually eliminated. This method is also very new and is only as reliable as the technology utilized. 6.3 AWWA Standards American Water Works Association(AWWA) has developed standards for cold-water meters and their reading devices. AWWA Standard C706-96, entitled,Direct-Reading Remote-Registration Systems for Cold-Water Meters, covers the description, application,and specifications for direct-reading and remote- registration cold-water meters for water utilities. It does not include encoding and interrogation units, which are covered separately in AWWA C707-82. As the encoder-type remote registration system are likely to be the ones that the City of San Luis Obispo would be most interested in,the following summary of AWWA Standard C707-82 is provided. A copy of this standard is also included in the Appendix. FRS3640001/December 18,2001 6-2 /SO4rL� C The greatest problem with preparing this standard was determining the degree of adaptability required between the various systems that were being manufactured. As a result,this standard requires that each,—) manufacturer's data acquisition units be capable of being adaptable to, and of obtaining,the necessary data from at least two additional encoder systems manufactured to the provisions of this standard. It is further anticipated that the present encoder-type systems will be compatible with automatic remote meter reading by using telephone circuits, electric service lines, cable TV,or other transmission media if compatible interface modules or circuits are made available. The design and nomenclature used to describe the devices and equipment are provided in the standard as well as operational criteria and standards. The technology has advanced rapidly since this standard was adopted and is continuing to advance. 6.4 Manufacturers A partial list of meter manufacturers that offer remote reading encoder systems are as follows: • Hersey Touchless AMR. This system works with any Hersey meter with conversion kits available for the older meters. Utilizes electronic encoder system not requiring contact between the register and the touchpad. A variety of software packages are available for route management and data transfer. The signal can be routed through telephone and radio transmissions. • ABB Water Meters, Inc. The SCANCODER System offers a variety of systems from the basic_ encoder system to the complex AMR system that utilizes radio frequency,telephone, cellular J telephone, and CATV systems. • Schlumberger. The Neptune Proread ARB system utilizes a remote meter reading probe with a cordless interface to the handheld unit. The probe automatically senses the register type, captures the reading through an inductive coupling,then transmits the reading to a handheld unit. 6.5 Case Studies The following two case studies are summarized from papers presented or published in AWWA journals with regard to remote reading metering systems. The first case summary is based on a six-year program for the Water Utility of the City of St. Paul, MN,which began in approximately 1985. General demographics of the service area and the meter program are described as follows: • 400,000 people are served with a distribution system of 1,230 miles of pipeline. • Average day consumption is 53 MGD. • Prior to 1984;the utility was experiencing a 50 percent lockout(unable to read meter),which required estimated bills and customer questions. • The goals are to(1) read any meter at any time and then issue a bill automatically,and (2) make every customer feel that they are the most important person that the staff spoke to that day. D FRS354000l/December 18,2001 613 I3042L� O • The six-year program consisted of 87,000 remote reading meters installed. • The total cost was $9 million, including anew computer and billing software. • Bills are issued automatically, and a new telephone service was installed. • The department was reorganized, creating customer service representatives with upgraded pay. • Approximately 500 to 650 meters were installed per week. An automatic data capture system was used rather than an AMR system. • Many unforeseen problems occurred throughout the entire process. A"pilot program" first to work out the bugs and streamline the conversion is recommended. • A reading system is recommended that is adaptable to the existing billing system and allows for adaptability of the new system to make future improvements. • Revenue bonds were sold in order to minimize water rate increases with payback from reduced operating costs. The results on the six-year program are summarized as follows: City of St. Paul,MN Meter Automation Results Previous System New System Item 1984 1991 Actual reads 55% 99% Cost of first stop for reader $1.64 $0.44 Residential accounts per quarter requiring 37,350 830 special handling Adjusted bills required per quarter 1,800 80 Actual meter reads per day per reader 72 407 Residential costs per quarter $74,866 $36,500_ Commercial costs per quarter $17,81$ $4,620 Other costs per quarter $76,435 0 Total reading cost per quarter $169,119 $41,140 Billing costs per quarter $81,812 $35,350 Total read/billing costs per quarter _ $250,93.1_ $76,650- Savings per year $697,124 Meter reading staff 22 8 _ Billing staff 19 6 Customer service staff 18 8 Total staff 59 22 Savings per year $812,000 FRs3540001/December 18,2001 6-4 f30VLE The second case study was done by the Kentucky-American Water Company in Lexington, Kentucky. - The general demographics of the area and meter program,which began in 1991, are described as follows: • Three automated systems were tested, but the water company decided against installing the AMR system. • The AMR systems were radio-frequency, handheld units that transmit meter readings to a central computer. • Accuracy was excellent, maintenance was low, and the process was simple. However,a cost estimate made using a financial model designed for investor-owner utilities showed AMR was not cost-effective at this utility. According to the model,the least expensive option would add $0.22 to the cost of each reading. • The systems tested did not have the capability to read other water meter suppliers. Manufacturers are working to improve compatibility. Other issues include possible licensing difficulties and battery cost and disposal issues. • It was concluded that a careful review of costs and benefits be made before making a decision to . change to automatic reading meters. • The systems were tested for a 9-month period. All systems were radio-frequency, handheld units able to read meter accurately in pits up to 500 feet away. The period of time was from March 3f D 1994 to January 5, 1995. Ninety-eight units from three suppliers were installed and monitored. • Based on the financial cost model utilized, a straight line calculation of cost was performed with a 15-year equipment life assumed to match the meter depreciation period. The difference between the expected system costs and the expected savings resulted in estimated additional costs ranging from$2.8 million to $7.9 million for the three systems evaluated. • Due to incompatibility of the three systems, additional equipment was required as compared to using only one system. Although some manufacturers are working to improve compatibility, installation of the systems tested would put the utility in the position of having a sole-source supplier for replacement equipment.. 6.6 Summary In summary,with regard to the possibility of converting the City of San Luis Obispo's water metering system to some type of remote registration or automatic meter reading system,the following steps are suggested: • Perform a thorough review of the manpower requirements and total costs associated with the present meter reading and billing operations of the City. FRS3540001/December 18,2001 6-5 /3042E O • Review the manpower requirements and costs relative to the operation, maintenance,and periodic replacement of all water meters in the City. • Inventory the types, ages,manufacturers, and typical installation situation of the meters in the City. • Solicit input from manufacturers of equipment of this type, systems available, compatibility with other systems, capital costs,warranties, life expectancy of equipment, expandability, etc. • Prepare an engineering and economic evaluation of the concept of conversion to the systems available and economically viable. • Conduct a pilot program with a representative sampling of residential and commercial meters within the City. Evaluate the results for two or three systems that have proven reputation, reliable equipment, and are compatible with other systems.. • If determined to be economically sound, implement the program over a fixed period of time, and evaluate the results yearly to improve efficiency and unforeseen problems. • Obtain a guarantee from the chosen vendor that will guarantee your growth path, future compatibility of the products you wish to purchase with products they will offer in the future. Standardize on these products and implement the automation plan to the level economically ocorrect for the City. O FRS3540001/Deoember 18,2001 - �� � Section 7 References The following references and other relevant information were used in the preparation of the City of San Luis Obispo Water System Master Water Plan: 1. Whale Rock Pump Stations Preliminary Design of Upgrade and Expansion, Leedshill-Herkenhoff, November 1989. 2. Preliminary Draft Report Basis of Design for Whale Rock Pump Stations, Leedshill-Herkenhoff, August 1990. 3. Operation and Maintenance Manuals for Whale Rock Upgrade of Existing Pump Facilities, Volumes I-IV,August 1993. 4. Water Treatment Plant Modifications and Ozone Pilot Study Technical Memorandum: Raw Water Characteristics& Treatment Objectives; Black& Veatch, October 1989. 5. Water Treatment Plant Modifications and Ozone Pilot Study Technical Memorandum: Plant Hydraulics, Black & Veatch, December 1989. 6. Water Treatment Plant Modifications & Ozone Pilot Study Final Report, Black& Veatch, June 1990. 7. Water Management Plan, Public Works Department,April 1989. 8. Urban Water Management Plan, City of San Luis Obispo, December 1990. 9. Urban Water Management Plan, Utilities Department,November 1994. 10. Operation and Maintenance Manual for Stenner Canyon Hydroelectric Plant, Public Services, November 1984. 11. Municipal Water Distribution System Improvements Preliminary Engineering Information, City Utilities Department, February 1974. 12. City of San Luis Obispo Water Supply Study,Engineering-Science, Inc.,April 1977. 13. Hathaway Pump Station Evaluation,Boyle Engineering, May 23, 1990. 14. Downtown Water System Model Calibration- Draft Report, Boyle Engineering, August 1, 1990. 15. Foothill/Reservoir No. 1 Zone Analysis, Boyle Engineering, March 28, 1991. 16. Groundwater Utilization Assessment, Boyle Engineering,July 1991. 17. Preliminary Specific Plan Analysis for the San Luis Obispo county Airport Area Specific Plan, n Willdan Associates, April 1988. FRS3540001/Deoember 18,2001 7-1 O18. City of San Luis Obispo, Ad Hoc Task Force on Resource Inventory: Water, March 1974. 19. Municipal Water Distribution System Improvements, Preliminary Engineering Information. February 25, 1974. 20. Edna Valley Water System Improvements, City of San Luis Obispo, January 1975. 21. Los Osos and Lower Higuera Area Water System Improvements, 1973. 22. Report on Water Works and Sewerage Works to Serve the Los Osos Valley,November 1959. 23. Report on Interim Municipal Waterworks Improvements to Alleviate Los Osos Valley Water Supply Problem, 1972. 24. Draft Margarita Area Specific Plan, City of San Luis Obispo. 25. Whale Rock Transmission Main Vulnerability Assessment, Cayucos to San Luis Obispo, California, Fugro West, March, 1997. 26. Measuring Saint Paul's Remote Meter Project by the End Results,Verne E. Jacobsen,Asst. General Manager, St. Paul Water Utility, June 25, 1991, AWWA paper at Annual Meeting 1991. 27. Automatic Meter-Reading is Not Always Economical, Kent D. Bienlien and Lary D. Bums, AWWA Journal,Vol. 90,Issue 2, 1995. 28. AWWA Standard C707-82, Encoder Type Remote-Registration Systems for Cold-Water Meters. 29. Hierarchy of Meter Reading Technology,Timothy D. Jeffcoat, Marketing Mgr., Schlumberger Industries, AWWA paper. FRS3540001/December 18,2001 7-2 �o�L� o - �o Appendix 0 ,o Pump Station Inspection Reports Fel Mar Pump Station Mechanical Equipment: Aurora centrifugal Rump 150 gam @ 170', 3500 RPM No. 81-3093 Type 4 1.1 BF Size 2X9 15 Hp motor Aurora centrifugal pump 600 gpm @ 170',3500 RPM No. 81-3056-1 Type 4 1.1 BF Size 4x OB 40 Hp motor Pressure gauges on inlet and outlet. No meter Instrumentation: Hard wire relay (24 volt)control to Highland Tank. 15 Hp pump is lead pump with 40 Hp only coming on when tank drops. Check valve only on discharge. No slow closing check. No pump failure alarm. Hous' Metal Butler building,approx. 12' x 20'. No room for additional pump and motor. Setting: Recessed from street between two homes. Recommendations: Abandon Highland Tank and possibly eliminate need for this pump station. Highland Tank is very small,partially buried,and equipped with questionable roofing. Other: Smaller pump operating during site visit. Moderately noisy,but housing dampens attenuation. No notable vibration. Bressi Pump Station Mechanical Equipment: DeLaval centrifugal Rump(assumed 400-gpm capacity based on City records) Model plate illegible 40 Hp motor DeLaval centrifugal Rump 400 gom @ 225' 3525 RPM 40 Hp motor Pressure gauges on inlet and outlet. No meter. Instrumentation: Hard wire relay control to Serrano Tank. Alternate lead/lag. Check valve only on discharge. No slow closing check. No pmnp failure alarm. Housing: Block/stucco building. Approx. 12' x 18' Setting: In.rural area, set among grazing sheep. Large rural residential lots in vicinity. Great views. Recommendations: Replace pumps in next 3 years. Very old pumps with leaky packing. Replacement parts likely not available. Trim vegetation within pump house fence. Need low level alarm on Serrano tank if not pump failure alar at Bressi pumps. Provide auxiliary power for proposed pumps in lieu of providing more storage at Serrano Tank. Other: Very quiet pump operations. Pumps are very old and packing is leaking at a high rate. City plans to replace pumps. FRS3540001becember 18.2001 1 f30VLE Transfer Pumps Mechanical Equipment: Pumps#1 and#2 are Fairbanks Morse pumps rated flow and lift illegible(assume to be 1,400 gpm each based on City data), 1750 RPM No. K2F157613 75 Hp motor Pump#3 is Marsh pump 1400 spm @ 150' No. C118333 Type H1 75 Hp motor Pressure gauges on inlet(19 psi)and outlet(88 psi). No meter,though one is Tanned in vault outside of pump house. Housing: Metal building, approx. 24' x 36'. No room for additional pump and motor. Setting: Agricultural area. Recommendations: Repack pump seals or plan pump replacement within 7 years. Install meter as fanned. Increase total capacity to 5,200 gpm to satisfy full buildout demand. Other: Pumps#1 and#2 operating during site visit. Moderately noisy. Seals leaking. No notable vibration. McCollum Pump Station Mechanical Equipment: Aurora centrifugal rump 200 spm @ 170', 3500 RPM No. 77-7880 Type 4 11 BF Size 2X10 15 Hp motor Aurora centrifugal rump 600 spm @ 170',3500 RPM No. 76-4088-1 Type 4 11 BF Size 4xl0B 40 Hp motor Pressure gauges on inlet and outlet. No meter. Used to be impeller meter in floor vault,but taken out and never replaced. Instrumentation: Telemetric control according to level in Slack Street Tank 15 Hp pump is lead pump with 40 Hp only coming on when tank drops. Tesco controller at-station,but used only to monitor discharge pressure No pump failure alarm. Housing: Block/stucco building,well light. Approx. 12' x 20' Setting: In residential neighborhood near Cal Poly us. Recommendations: Automatic dialer alarm or SCADA connection to alert of pump failure. Replace meter in floor vault. Equip with emergency power or provide more storage at Slack Street tank. Other: Neither pump was operating during site visit. FRS3540001/Deoember 18,2001 2 Ferrini Pump Station Mechanical Equipment: Pumps#1 and#2 are Mueller pumps rated flow 1060 apm @ 185', 1750 RPM Model 5L I 75 Hp motor Pressure gauges on inlet(38psi) and outlet(I 10psi). No meter. Instrumentation: Radio telemetry to level in Ferrini Tank. Slow opening/closing opening/closingCla Val purnp control valves. Housing: Block building,approx.22' x 22'. No room for additional pump and motor. Se Adjacent to Highway 1, alongside grazing area. Recommendations: Provide meter and SCADA system for controls and reporting. Consider adding auxi liary power and fire pump. Other: One pump operatingduring site visit. Fairly quiet. No notable vibration. Alrita H dro neumatic Pump Station Mechanical Equipment: Two 15 Bkpumps. Identification tags not legible. Instrumentation: Operate according to setting of hydropneumatic tank. Housing: Metal shed approx. 6' x 6'. Setting: Residential area. Recommendations: Upgrade this pump station to provide fire flow with auxiliary ower to Alrita Zone. Other: Neither pump operating during site visit. Hydropneumatic tank is approx.4' diameter by 12' long. Rosemont Pump Station Mechanical Equipment: Two Baldor pumps and motors. Small horsepower. Identification tags not legible assumed to be 110 gpm each based on City data). Instrumentation: Radio telemetry to level in Rosemont Tank. Check valve action only,no pump control valves. Housing: Pumps covered by metal enclosure with no bottom. No room for additional pump and motor. Setting: Inside fence line near residences. Thick vegetation. Immediately adjacent to small Highland Tank. Recommendations: Upgrade pump station with new pumps plus a 1,600-gPm fire pump and auxilia ry power. Install in more conventional housing. Provide meters and SCADA system for controls and reporting. Provide PRV to supply lower Highland Zone during fire demands. Other. Neither um operating during site visit. O FRs3s4000tme. cemner 18.2001 3 f30�LE Bishop Pump Station Mechanical Equipment: Peerless pump,-no rated flow or head stated on tag(assumed to be 1,280 gpm based on City data), Model 6AD14 Impeller No. 2668925, 11.65"diameter 50 Hp motor Aurora pump, rated flow 700 spm @100'. Model#81-7449,4 x I I 25 Hp motor. Pressure gauges inoperable. No meter. Instrumentation: Stations operates according to transducer on discharge lirie. Fairly accurate with level in Bishop Tank. Check valve action only,no pump control valves. Housing: Masonry building 16' x 32' with sliding glass doors. Room for one more pump and motor. Setting: In parking lot of medical facility. Residences nearby. Recommendations: Pumps to be replaced as needed due to age. Replace pressure gauges and install meter. Other: Neither pump operating during site visit. Edna Saddle Pump Station Mechanical Equipment: The one pump is Paco centrifugal pump,rated flow 1600 spm @ 1721, 1750 RPM 100 Hp motor Pressure gauges on inlet 38psi) and outlet 110 psi). No meter. Instrumentation: When in service,signaled to operate according to level in Terrace Hill tank. Broad &Caudill PRV also set to open according to Terrace Hill tank and Edna Saddle pump status. Housing: No housing.. Setting: Adiacent to Edna Saddle tank. Not visible from surrounding properties. Recommendations: This booster only needed when well production in Edna Saddle zone out-pace demand. Other: Motor housing rusting. Not operated since approx. 1992. No periodic start-up performed. FRWs Ml/December ta,2001 4 /304FL@ '`fen ti� :{ ."` ° � !�i atf.. M � • • ...A .,�; i V W.. -ter t ^p{eaqSr. ' 1 r i �.. -?� r ��� � .J"ate'/{♦t :! f- I � Il Ilfl � l �"'r� ,.rk,� �r a* � ..� � :`may •.. .,. "�'ti.. _ �� �„�^ tt Nil, """ —.r. r.�:.�7_-- �.� j -tea:.+ kvti m• .. 1't 1 1-7 s �a- x It • . ITIS I I ..+.=irt v ;�" :.SrsT".�'7� .<.r. �-�.` " `•szah['"ln�"""x '+>.rp�"` " .�.= , •g, +..Ri. S �.•. Y Ye f Y+�i N l e'1 � a •!� ° �`•,•. ,� s.,,y.4 r �.R ��`% .(:• ,.�2?F'y�„� �ro. r,zJl..+�i d1, ro •s - :� e�• r?ns'�i �t nom` .� x Gip �ll •-..,Ja �"'•�i?5:. •.�;i`-f.+kY`Zf`~f��a.�af" x.., i a*. rr moi.•. � � . _ •e s P v t .v ^: p 'r It � •_ 4 <� � ¢' 'r r� 'i A / - r � r r �_"0�"1..:'.-r��,..',y{ Y�'�1�IYyfr�. )*(<u� '.n. � j'...,•ab•✓ �5.+.1C �.fi �rJ 'ifs'! � y:"<a" 5'.. ✓�r, z + a t !fir' x? •'jl �� (ls tsi..%^r x �,t�i��` { � r •'�S �Q* 3r� AaMsr..•:�" s..rt < �. .+'�• �eelR'^ x r .n k ,.yf ax f-kn ')i��s'� � x � :t t to >^ nY ♦ `•v ` l t Ja�y��q '�Tr ti JJ e a� `4° „�r•�'��"/a"f �a E m xyp, ,s J. J J }WJKr,,,,r Ove•T« ,j` � i y�:, z +ad " .rr n ��� :r .c i •Y Y ) (fS�d' yid+ ,,.r ''` r� " ( t �•.d��"�'Ss A":y+� ,� � `; pu.5' `u. Y J+1�Cy��c,[.r�'lL.i ���z�4�g[✓��i�/�E�` ,�f� . ,, rt'r1' _,"s(rvt t. ''�s v v dC` {•+^ ^•�`r"' e._PL aM 334^ ,..� r K.w t �" „ �ii4*y��{-�y,hi:3, •r`�4�ir r � �MY•.Y.�`rte+��Ak..ay��r�if' �� n i � i.JY��J.f r .-.. i h.a�,tyy SCJ•�.. `�i1 � •a-,,. •4a" �rs:` u ,3. ��` ,..is,. t�S u_w�✓.tif?�w`�^�:.'It� c{"i .ta.. 9+; a-:.•a: r. . M � ,p t C c v . e - n •'SF � �� �F YaM+lu` �`(�y3'�.w�! `• f Iu �.P��_ �S� n ws > � o }. i xxe+ w•.«. x ,a S'2T '.�54 R "fiw 'mom s aha .n v' ,. rx '3N' y .a`5"3 �.. i� A}t2.0 ^V" d�ifT y an>^.•� iL. i �R'y ��,�¢SNy� 5 t f'°w,` Bressi Pump Station Interior 2'`' .:x. F4 hvJ '.rvaAd fi+ry hY SCJ jef w• £ b} '��^ OBressi Pump Station Interior City of San Luis Obispo Water System Master Plan FRS35400011January 26, 1M 03080LE ❑i:at_J 1. g. , a e o c _ ..__�-,�.�........ .. ._.. _. .--. -�•t+e;,�^'c0°.o°moo � O° IL4° +e k'4 .^ n y' ✓` `Tkc W&^�. �� _ p o e e.P w- ff T .,,oho°� ��� ° oP•.� .as � -tea� ���^ ..� ��x � R 1 m����-°03 o.a ° .30° �9oo'..k���aO d� a eg iY ° •�r,Y 6- ° IB"WE . Transfer Station Exterior Viewed From Stenner Creek Road r GG wn r j 3 e0.�87 &w O `doa�6� roo � � ° ���°,� o ��4.�APo � `� �� � ��,i� �°°d>•...�a��o'�a o � O ,p � O ek b B4i. 0& �p i7,0�0p O" G p A Oa eo•B..po �L Transfer Pump Station Exterior Viewed from Stenner Creek Road City of San Luis Obispo Water System Master Plan FRS35400011January 26.1999 HaVVE s 'tea° k a � 1 [ j I1�J,J/{✓1yr Z r F w , �. -1 _• FJ ,r �' 4r"'t Y{^� ka _ , ^'1P 4•:P�1 ~ • I h I I •111 F .r 1 •�'fid p'a' do w t+ tYi. ..J fl 4J it :.+'4n,..' •*. ,.,. �- 'may, �' 'i. �.}...-. K _ ti Y - F JR k v '!+•A'M +�: c•". 4 � Y -"yam x �, f b 1 1 1 ! - •1'1'1 r — � r, v • ^ •+moi.� �� ' �`.'r3r.�:.-✓;'" �",r^'r�r ,_..._ ;`� 'std. x x • •x. .e� , ,#f 1f#»te./._- '�' ¢'L" �v t Y+ CJI 4 '� �1] x �ev� y\x `� x 1,r�, w " >b �+ g"�if .! •"s� + ��s a HeM 7 1I �+ d,r It OT 1 yl�•!,{(yyl.`•!/ '.. .�� a I Jam' f t -' p 4•,x • {, a�lti 1 r r i � xN Y 'I,j ate. ( .I♦ '' � � • I , / / 11 a / I f y � J > iolp tiLl - . I I• 1 � f AV . .•ems �� A. F�� 4� r ", e t gt.Z 4 TT, IT s. v r •. A M��n C... I .r r .�^x •v . -- 4 1E 't •rs 31<��; "� ""ti: ^.'4. F" �`+I'Y- r� �', a � � :r?+L„y A.P� .L- ZZ � A t� a r ! I I • / I I f / C k, � i{L i�J� ��brie✓%.-5. � y *^b 1�x�'�t �. J� �$����.g+�sa�j^'>A`M'1:.. r� 3+:�-�✓`�' ems: ro. i X'._ L. a.� R� � n^S r �E,y:,: .; {" s �� C•ty �� H"5 � w A \ (1 W j��}' � �b^t✓'FQ w A E Sa `?*V \774,,4 �r f X S.S 0 Wn•4•ten` 1 1 ~i'' �..4.ah ♦. 4 Edna Saddle Tank Access Road I , d ' h K ;.kts i. i ,.i 's.✓ R5 Y. _ y Edna Saddle Tank with ControUChemical Building in Foreground City of San Luis Obispo Water System Master Plan FRS3540001/January 26, 1999 /jOS+LE C� ka. 4. 1 •K S { Edna Saddle Tank with Control/Chemical Building in Foreground of✓ - q� 3� � � � ����q ��'• i NO i Edna Saddle Pump Station City of San Luis Obispo Water system Master Plan FRS3540001/January 25. 1999 ROYGE r Aessv"43 3 AM 4.0 MG RESERVOIR WTPAdd Fft TAW fxxrw 70 ZONE ...� , fKX93AOW ADD ?EW PRV, FROM TAW PAW*"W HK*LAND TO ZONE �r � ZONE ABANDON MAA ps NEW "' # PA`TfW�IA Foo ADD FIRE PUNIF. TAW I 1 °' mw FESERVORM ZONE 10 �^* *owl UTILIZE PIPELINE �� *Aft mw FOR LOOPING IN SEF41AW ZONE ZONE 12 VALVE ZONE 5 ZONE Y ZONE t ADD l #.2 MG RESERVOIR A47/ '* t '• AL1 ... . TAW AND RAP .� ALfTrA ps �F �+s wr w♦w ww.rwe uwr wr.rw wr w qw f /� °rs ' VE &M SADDLE ADD 0.2 MG k RESERVOIRI , �, t MACE tea.. , zow a , wo ZONE I MARGARITA 4000 040 I 40 m ♦ NA Ewo , ..�. r- 3 t of Ile O � z ADD V PIPELINE rFOR LOOPING PIPE SEGMENTS WHICH MAY ' BE DELETED IF DEVELOPED � AS "{OPEN SPACE" r • ar r sow I { 10 ESS ` .. . . . 3 ,�.. .. . . * 16" 16*' 20 fK NUMBERING ? s, E +f PER TABLE 24 OFREPORT FIRE FLOW MODELING LOCATION EXPANSION AREA BOUNDARY =z . PRESSURE ZONE BOUNDARY i i.. NEW RESERVOIR & SIZE { ` #. M PRESSURE REDUCING VALVE ,�. .. .» O FLOW DIRECTION IT' � El - j PLA As N i z. 1 �rr 3' a f 1 � F na t.. RL R LOP OVEMCII I D 1 =7 Saw PLATE