HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/03/2007, BUS. 5 - 2007 WATER RESOURCES STATUS REPORT council Jamul 3, 2007
j acEnaa Repoin .
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
FROM: John Moss, Utilities Dire
Prepared By: Gary W. He rson,Water Division Manager G
Ron Munds, Utilities Conservation Coordinator
SUBJECT: 2007 WATER RESOURCES STATUS REPORT
CAO RECOMMENDATION
Receive and file report.
DISCUSSION
The purpose of the annual Water Resources Status Report (WRSR) is to provide an overview of
various aspects of the City's water resources. The attached report discusses five major topics:.
1. Existing Water Supply Status
2. Multi-Source Water Supply Projects
3. Water Conservation Program
4. Water Supply Strategies to Meet Future Needs
5. Projected Water Supply Situation
The following is a summary of the information contained in the attached 2007 Water Resources
Status Report.
Report Summar
This past year was critically dry with rainfall amounts at about 40% of normal. However, with the
previous two years of above average rainfall, the City's water resources are in relatively good shape
with supplies projected to last until February 2013. The City is continuing to make progress on new
water resources with ongoing implementation of the Water Reuse Project and the implementation
of expanded conservation programs this past year. In addition, significant progress has been made
on the Nacimiento Pipeline Project which is currently out for construction bids.
While the current water supply situation is favorable, the City will continue it's efforts relative to
implementation and expansion of the water conservation programs. The 2007 Water Resources
Status Report provides a brief synopsis of the City's water supply status and it's ongoing water
conservation program efforts.
Existing Water Supply Status
The City's two water supply reservoirs (Salinas and Whale Rock) were at 78% and 86% of total
storage capacity respectively as of May 1, 2007. The City's total water use for 2006 was 5,999
a f=/
Council Agenda Report—2007 Water Resources Status Report Page 2
acre feet (af) compared to 6,098 af in 2005. The City's per capita water demand appears to have
stabilized over the past several years. It should be noted that the per capita use rate is not the
amount that the average person uses but takes into account all water uses including residential,
commercial, industrial, landscape, etc. This past year's use was 121 gallons per capita per day
(gpcd), a decrease from last year's use of 122 gpcd.
Water Available for Development
The policies in the Water Management Element of the General Plan determine the water available
for new development. Table 1 below identifies the water available for development. The figures in"
Table 1 include the additional water resources which were added last year from the Water Reuse
Project (130 af) and the expanded water conservation program (120 af). These two new water
supplies are the first new water sources added to the City's available supplies since Whale Rock
Dam was completed in 1961.
Table 1: Water Available for Development
Year Population Present Water Safe Annual Water Available
Demand Yield I for Allocation
@ 145 gpcd
2007 44,239 7,186 a.f. 7,720 af.' 534 a.f.
1 From Water Management Element,Table 1: includes reductions due to siltation to date
2 Includes additional water from Water Reuse and Expanded Conservation Programs
Multi-Source Water Supply Projects
One of the major goals of the Council is the pursuit of additional long term water supplies to meet
the current and future water demands of the community. The City is currently pursuing or
expanding the use of the following two water supply projects: Water Reuse Project and the
Nacimiento Pipeline Project. Water deliveries from the Water Reuse Project began this past year
and initial water use is projected at 130 acre feet per year. The project has the potential to provide
approximately 1,000 acre feet per year for non-potable purposes.
The Nacimiento Pipeline Project is being administered by the County of San Luis Obispo and has
been under review for over 12 years. The design efforts associated with this project have been
completed and the project is currently out for construction bids. The project bids have been divided
into five bid packages with staggered bid opening dates. The final bid package will open on August
16, 2007.
Last year, the City Council added 120 acre feet to the City's safe annual yield based on an
expanded water conservation program approved and implemented during the 2003-2005
Financial Plan period. The expanded program included an irrigation efficiency component for
both residential and commercial customers and a state funded retrofit of dishwashing spray rinse
Jz
Council Agenda Report—2007 Water Resources Status Report Page 3
valves in food preparation establishments. The program is analyzed on an annual basis to ensure
that the water saving goals are being met.
Projected Water Supply Situation
The City utilizes a computer program to project how long the City's available water supplies would
last based on a number of assumptions. The model uses historical drought weather patterns,
projected water demands,etc., to forecast the City's water supply position and to make certain water
policy recommendations. The model predicts current water supplies would last until February of
2013 if the City was to enter into a drought period with conditions comparable to those experienced
in the 1986-91 drought(see Figure 5 of the WRSR).
Secondary Supply Requirements and Reliability Reserve
At the June 5, 2007 City Council meeting, the Council requested discussion of the additional water
supplies requested from the Nacimiento Project relative to the "reliability reserve". The reliability
reserve language was added to the City Charter in November of 1996. The Charter language is
shown below:
"As identified in the water management Element of the General Plan, the City shall strive
to acquire additional water supplies as a `-`reliability reserve" to protect the City from
future water shortages. Once the City has acquired a portion or all of the reliability
reserve, the additional water supply shall 'only be used to meet City needs during
unpredictable changes such as a new worst case drought, loss of one of the City's water
sources, contamination of a source, or failure of a new source to provide projected yield,
and not to allow additional development."
The reliability reserve was first included in City policies immediately following the 1986-1991
drought period. The City had experienced a very critical water supply situation and was pursuing a
temporary desalination project in the event that the drought continued. At that time, the benefits
associated with the reliability reserve and the limitations based on the above language were not
thoroughly evaluated(see attached reports for detailed information).
In September of 2002, the Water Management Element was amended to delete the section relative
to the reliability reserve. This amendment was made following public hearings before the Planning
Commission and City Council where significant discussion and input was provided regarding the
potential costs and associated benefits of acquiring additional water sources. for a "reliability
reserve". A detailed discussion of the reasons for deleting this section (the "reliability reserve") are
provided in the staff report from the May 14, 2002 Council meeting(Attachment 2 to this report).
In June of 2004, the Water Management Element was again amended ( see Attachment 3) to
include additional water supplies to meet "secondary supply requirements".. The language
associated with secondary supply requirements is shown below:
Council Agenda Report—2007 Water Resources Status Report Page 4
"Develop supplemental water supplies to provide additional yield to account for future
siltation losses, drought contingency, loss of yield from an existing supply source,
operational requirements to meet peak operating demands, and other unforeseen
conditions."
As noted in Attachment 3, the policy for Secondary Supply Requirements differs from the
previous policy for development of a "reliability reserve" in that it defines the Secondary Supply
Requirements in a broad sense and allows for their appropriate use over a broad range of
conditions . Additionally, it does not place the priority for their development above that needed
to meet our General Plan goals and does not quantify the amount required . That amount may be
variable and should be determined by Council based on a variety of conditions, either existing or
future, and should also be considered in the context of available supply opportunities.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with the recommended action. Any fiscal impacts associated
with the pursuit of additional water supply projects or additional conservation measures have been
or will be addressed through the City's Financial Plan processes.
ATTACHMENTS
1. 2007 Water Resources Status Report
2. Staff report: "Water Supply Reliability Reserve". May 14, 2002
3. Staff report: "Water and Wastewater Management Element",June 29,2004
City ofSan Luis Obispo
. 2007 Water Resources
Status Report
June 2007
Prepared by: Gary Henderson, Water Division Manager
Ron Munds, Utilities Conservation Coordinator
ATTACHMENT 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
L EXISTING WATER SUPPLY SITUATION I
Current Status 1
Water Consumption 2
Water Available for Development 3
11. MULTI-SOURCE WATER PROJECTS 4
Water Reuse Project 5
Nacimiento Pipeline Project 5
111. WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAMS 6
Financial Incentives Summary 7
High Efficiency Washing Machine Replacements 7
Technical Assistance 8
Public Information& Education 9
Other Program Highlights 10
Future Water Conservation Programs 10
IV. WATER SUPPLY STRATEGY TO MEET FUTURE NEEDS 12
V. PROJECTED WATER SUPPLY SITUATION 13
Reservoir Storage Curve 13
VI. SUMMARY 13
.�— Ge
ARACHMENT 1
City of San Luis Obispo
2007 Water Resources Status Report
The annual Water Resources Status Report for the City of San Luis Obispo is prepared by
the Utilities Department to provide the City Council and interested members of the
community with an update of the status of existing water resources as well as water
supply projects being pursued to meet the community's future needs. The report covers
five main areas:
1. Existing Water Supply Status
2. Multi-Source Water Supply Projects
3. Water Conservation Programs
4. Water Supply Strategy to Meet Future Needs
5. Projected Water Supply Situation
The report provides an opportunity to evaluate the existing water supply situation for the
City, identify the amount of water currently available to serve new development, and
discuss issues relative to existing polices and water projects beingpursued.
I. EXISTING WATER SUPPLY SITUATION
The City of San Luis Obispo currently utilizes four sources of water supply to meet the
community's water demand: Santa Margarita Lake (also referred to as Salinas Reservoir),
Whale Rock Reservoir, groundwater, and recycled water from the City's Water
Reclamation Facility. The recycled water was added to the City's water resources
portfolio this past year delivering water for irrigation to sports fields, median islands and
other landscape areas. The adopted safe annual yield from Salinas and Whale Rock
Reservoirs, and groundwater resources for 2007 is 7,470 acre feet (af) which takes into
account annual estimated reductions due to siltation at both reservoirs. In addition, last
year's Water Resources Status Report added an additional 130 of of water from the Water
Reuse Project and 120 of from the expanded water conservation program. With these
two additional water supply sources, which are discussed in more detail in the following
sections, the total safe annual yield for 2007 is 7,720 af. The actual total city-wide water
use for 2006 was 5,999 of (including recycled water) which was about 1.6% lower than
last year's use of 6,098 af.
Current Status
This past year was critically dry with rainfall amounts for the City of San Luis Obispo
and Salinas and Whale Rock Reservoirs significantly below average as reflected in Table
1. In fact, this was the second driest year of record for Whale Rock Reservoir, with the
driest season occurring in 1975-76 with a total of 7.41 inches. With the limited rainfall, a
"live stream" was never declared for the Salinas River and thereforeno additional water
was added to storage at the lake this year. As of May 1, 2007, Salinas and Whale Rock
Reservoirs were at approximately 78% and 86% of total capacity respectively. The good
reservoir storage amounts are a result of the previous two years of above average rainfall..
�r
2007 Water Resources Status Report AnACHMENT 9
Page 2 V IYI 'Y
For the calendar year Table 1: Area Rainfall
of 2006, the water Location 2006/07' Average % of
demand for the City Average
of San Luis Obispo City of SLO—Reservoir 10.83" 22.42" 48%
was provided from #1
the four available Whale Rock Reservoir 7.65" 19.72" 39%
sources as shown iii Salinas Reservoir 8.49" 21.39" 40%
Table 2. The total
water demand for all 1. Rainfall through May 1,2007
City uses in 2006 was 5,999 of which was approximately 1.6% less than the total water
use for 2005. The total amount of City water use shown in Table 2 does not include
domestic water delivered to Cal Poly University which is accounted for from their
available water supply from Whale Rock Reservoir. As of May 1, 2007, the City's
available water storage in Salinas Reservoir (above minimum pool) was 16,573 acre feet.
The City's share of the Whale Rock storage(above minimum pool) was 17,046 acre feet.
The combined total water storage available to meet city water needs was 33,619 acre feet.
Based on the available water storage in both reservoirs, estimated groundwater
production and assuming.the return of drought conditions as experienced during the late
Table 2: Water Supply Sources 1980s, the City
has
Salinas Whale Groundwater Recycled Total approximately 5'/z
Rock years of water
1,803 of 4,054 of 133* of. 9 of 5,999 of supply, according
to the computer
* 157 of total,including Corp Yard and Golf Course wells storage model as
shown in Figure 5
(figures are at end of report). The model assumes that additional conservation measures,
consistent with our water shortage contingency plan, are implemented when supplies are
estimated to last only three years. The various stages of conservation are indicated in
Figure 5 and are discussed in more detail in the Water Shortage Contingency Plan. The
Plan is an Appendix to the Urban Water Management Plan that was updated and adopted
in December of 2005.
Water Consumption
As noted previously, the total City water use for 2006 was approximately 1.6% lower
than the use for 2005. Table 3 shows the population estimates from 1997 through 2006
as well as the total City water use and corresponding per capita use rate. It is significant
to note that overall City wide water use has been essentially "flat" for the past 10+ years.
Based on the policies contained in the Water Management Element of the General Plan,
the City has adopted a per capita water use rate of 145 gallons per person per day (gpcd)
for projecting future water supply needs and determining the availability of water for new
development. The 145 gpcd figure is not the amount that the average person uses but is a
planning figure and takes into account all water uses including residential, commercial,
a N
2007 Water Resources Status Report ATTACHMENT T f 1
Page 3
industrial, landscape, etc. Chart 1 shows the water use between different customer
classes for 2006 (landscape use is only specific dedicated landscape meters) which is
very consistent with previous years. The City-wide water use is monitored to insure that
actual water use remains below the adopted planning figure of 145 gpcd so that the City
does not exceed our available water resources.
While the per capita water use increased following the end of the 1986-91 drought and
mandatory conservation measures in 1992, the use rate has stabilized since 1997 as
reflected in Table 3. Table 3: Population Estimates, Water Use & Rainfall
This last year's per
capita water use was. Year PopWation Total Per Rainfall
approximately 121 Water Use Capita (inches)
gpcd, which was a - (acre feet) . : ( cd)__.
slight decrease from 1997 41,807 6,220 133 31.36
last year's use of 122 1998 42,201 5,853 124 43.54
gpcd. There are a 1999 42,446 6,172 130 16.34
number of factors that 2000 44,174 6,121 124 24.97
can affect the per 2001_ 44,218 5,886 119 24.53
capita use rate 2002 44,333 6,032 121 22.91
including: population 2003 44,225 5,968 120 16.08
estimates provided by 2004 44,163 6,239 126 40.09
the State and timing 2005 44,619 6,098 , 122 30.35
and amount of rainfall 2006 44,326 - 5,999 121 10.83
each year. 1. Rainfall amounts for July through June from Cal Poly weather station
2. Rainfall amount from County rain gage at City's Reservoir#1
Water Available for
Development
The policies in the Water Management Element of the General Plan determine the water
available for new development. Section 8.1.2.A. states "The City will determine the water
available for allocation to
Chart 1:Water Use by Category new development by either-,
the adopted safe annual yield
Landscape of the City's water supplies
Irrigation single minus present demand as
9% Family identified in Policy 3.1.4, or
Commercial Residential the projected demand at
29% 42% build-out as identified in
Multi-family Policy 3.1.3 minus present
Residential demand as identified in
20% Policy 3.1.4; whichever is
less. Available allocations
will be assigned to development in a way that supports balanced growth, consistent with
the General Plan." Policy 3.1.4 and related policies define present water use as the current
population times the adopted per capita water use rate (145 gallons per capita per day).
Based on these policies, Table 4 indicates the water available to allocate to new
TACHMENT 1
2007 Water Resources Status Report
A
Page 4
development in 2007. These figures include the additional water resources added to our safe
annual yield last year from the Water Reuse Project (130 af) and the expanded water
conservation programs (120 af). The population figures are provided by the California
Department of Finance. The estimates provided recently adjusted the population estimate
for 2006 from 44,439 to 44,326. This year's estimate of 44,239 represents an approximate
0.2%population decrease from last year.
Table 4: Water Available for Development
Year Population Present Water Safe Annual Water Available
Demand Yields for Allocation
@145 _ cd
2007 44,239 7,186 of 7,720 of 534 of
1. From Water Management Element,Table 1: includes reductions due to siltation to daze. Includes the increase in safe
annual yield from the Water Reuse Project(130 afy)and the expanded conservation programs(120 afy)
Per Water Management Element Policy 8.1.3, one-half of the water available for allocation
will be reserved to serve intensification and infill development within city limits existing as
of July 1994. Therefore, 267 acre feet is available to serve new annexation areas outside the
July 1994 city limits and 267 acre feet is reserved for infill and intensification projects.
Table 5 below shows the water that has been allocated to residential versus non-residential
development for the past ten years and includes all projects within the city, both infill and
annexation areas.
Table 5: Water for Development(acre feet)
Year Residential Non-Residential Total
1997 39.96 16.94 56.90
1998 41.40 8.32 49.72
1999 16.26 17.42 33.68
2000 25.08 1.73 26.81
2001 29.10 20.52 49.62
2002 25.02 1.08 26.10
2003 57.87 14.59 72.46
2004 76.65 14.28 90.93
2005 21.96 34.57 56:63
2006 9.36 1 12.52 21.88
Total 342.66_ - __ _141.97_ 484.73
II. MULTI-SOURCE WATER PROJECTS
Water Management Element Policy 7.1 identifies the strategy of developing multiple
sources of water supply as a basis for strengthening the security and reliability of the
water resources to meet the City's needs. The policy states that "The City shall continue to
develop and use water resource projects to maintain multi-source water supplies, and in this
ATTACHMENT 1
2007 Water Resources Status Report
Page 5
manner, reduce reliance on any one source of water supply, to provide for peak operating
demands in the event one of the City's major water supply sources is unavailable, and to
increase its supply options in future droughts or other water supply emergencies." Much
like financial planning strategies, a diversified "portfolio" of water supplies will protect
against future uncertainties of any one water source.
The City is currently pursuing or expanding use of the following supplemental water
supply projects: Water Reuse Project and the Nacimiento Pipeline Project. Additional
groundwater resources, potential desalination facility, and the Salinas Reservoir
Expansion Project are additional options that are not currently being pursued. The
following is a brief status report on the projects currently being considered to meet the
City's future water needs.
Water Reuse Proiect
The construction of the Water Reuse Project was completed in 2006 and the first recycled
water deliveries began in May of 2006. The first use site for recycled water was the new
landscaped median islands along.Los Osos Valley Road. Since that time, additional sites
have been added including the Damon-Garcia Sportsfields, Calle Joaquin street
landscaping, and other minor sites. Additional sites are scheduled in the near future to
receive recycled water for irrigation purposes.
It was anticipated that approximately 130 acre feet of recycled water would be used in
2006 and was included as additional water supplies last year as noted in the "Water
Available for Development" section of this report. Due to delays in user site
modifications and other constraints, only 9.08 acre feet of recycled water was used during
2006. It is anticipated that additional user sites will be added this year and that
approximately 130 acre feet should be utilized from the recycled water system. It is
anticipated that an additional 25 acre feet will be delivered each year as additional user
sites are added to the system.
Nacimiento Pipeline Proiect
On June 29, 2004, the City Council authorized participation in the Nacimiento Pipeline
Project for a total of 3,380 acre feet. Work on the project this past year included
preparation of the final plans and specifications for the project as well as work associated
with right-of-way acquisition, permitting, environmental mitigation plans, contractor
outreach programs and other related project issues.
The project plans and specifications were finalized with the project being divided into
five separate bid packages to encourage multiple contractor interest and a more
competitive bidding environment. Four of the bid packages were advertised on May 22,
2007. The fifth bid package was advertise on June 12, 2007. Bid openings have been
staggered about a week apart starting on July 12`s' with the final bid opening scheduled .
for August 16''.
2007 Water Resources Status Report
ATTACHMENT 9
Page 6
The current bid estimate for the entire project, including design, right-of-way acquisition,
etc., is approximately $190 million. The contracts executed by participants in the project
in 2004 have an "opt out" provision if the total project's estimated cost exceeds $150
million. A special City Council meeting has been scheduled for August 14, 2007 to
consider the City's continued participation in the project. By this date; 4 out of the 5 bid
packages (approximately 75% of the project costs) will have been received and a much
more accurate estimate for the total project cost will be available for Council
consideration. The current schedule anticipates beginning construction work in October
2007 with water deliveries beginning by the end of 2010.
III.WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAMS
The Water Conservation Program is an integral part of the City's overall water
management strategy and is now being considered as a new source of supply,
contributing to our safe annual yield based on the water saved. In the future, the amount
added to the City's safe annual yield will be the additional conservation measures
implemented and verified to provide reliable water savings since 2003. The water
savings achieved prior to 2003 are not added to the safe annual yield since they include
toilet retrofitting and other conservation programs accomplishments which were the basis
for establishing the per capita planning figure at 145 gallons per day.
Since the mid 1980's, the City has implemented water efficiency programs and policies
that have enabled the City to decrease overall demand while the population continues to
grow. The importance of the program for the last 18 years should not be understated.
During this period, the City was able to sustain its economic development and support its
growth objectives without adding a new water supply.
In 1991, the City was one of the original signatories to Best Management Practices
(BMPs) as defined in the Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Urban Water
Conservation in California (MOU). This agreement is a voluntary collaborative effort by
California water agencies and environmental organizations. The BMPs are a list of 14
specific conservation measures that MOU signatories agree to implement. These
measures include water audits, incentive programs, and public information programs.
Based on the BMP's, the City's Water Conservation Program is divided into three
primary components:
1. Financial incentives for the installation of water efficient devices
2. Technical assistance
3. Public education and information
The following is a summary of these water conservation program components:
�-lam
2007 Water Resources Status Report ATTACHMENT f
Page 7
Financial Incentives Summary
With the adoption of the UWMP in 1994, toilet retrofitting had been identified as a
significant water demand management strategy and integral part of the City's overall
water management plan. As of December 2006, approximately 32,500 toilets out of an
estimated 39,000 toilets have been retrofitted either through the Retrofit Rebate, Retrofit
Upon Sale and/or the Water Offset Programs. This equates to approximately 83% of all
toilets within the City of San Luis Obispo and represents an annual estimated water
savings of over 1,400 acre feet. .
Table 6 summarizes the toilet Table 6: Summary_ of Toilet Retrofitting
retrofit activity and the - - --
program totals since 1990. A Year Rebate Offset Total 91,3a
vast majority of the toilets
replaced through the years 1990-2001 9,081 21,651 30,732ngs
have been through the Water 2002 54 860 914Offset Program (Retrofit to 2003 93 274 367
Build)..The mandatory Water 2004 38 297 335 20 afy
Offset Program was 2005 53 117 170 10 afy
terminated in January 2002. 2006 49 0 49 3 afy
As can be seen in Table 6, ___ _
toilet replacement has Totals Since 9,368 23,199 32,567 1,483 afy
dramatically decreased since 1990
that time. Because of the
decline in participation in the rebate program and the shift in focus and implementation of
the water efficiency measures, the toilet rebate program ended on June 30, 2007. The
2008 Water Resources Status Report will summarize and provide the final details of the
overall program.
High Efficiency Washing Machine Replacements
Table 7: Waship_g Machine Rebates The High Efficiency
Year Rebate Savin macre Washing Machine Rebate
Savings Program was implemented
__. feet per ear____ in 2001 and offered $150
2001 45 .75 dollar rebate for qualifying
2002 131 2.2 machines. As indicated in
2003 31 .52 Table 7, participation in the
2004 60 1 program has been up and
2005 87 1.5 down. In 2005, a two tier
2006 47 .78 rebate schedule of a $100 or
Total 401_ 6.75 $150 was implemented
- based on the water savings
of the machine purchased. Staff continues to market the program to the local appliance
dealers and is hopeful that participation will increase with the stepped up efforts. It is
ATTACHMENT 9
2007 Water Resources Status Report
Page 8
estimated that about 6.75 acre feet of water will be saved annually by these water
efficient machines with considerable energy savings as aside benefit.
Technical Assistance
Residential and Commercial Water Audits
The Utilities Conservation Office (UCO) offers technical assistance to water customers
via free indoor and outdoor water audits. The audits include indoor and outdoor leak
detection services, irrigation system evaluation, landscape plant material information and
other information on how to use water efficiently. The requests for audits are typically
received from people experiencing high water bills, residents participating in the low
income assistance program, or customers requesting a utility bill adjustment through the
Utility Billing Adjustment Committee.
The Water Audit Program has been very active the last several years due mainly to the
staff follow-ups to high meter readings and the
mailing of letters to customers using more than 25 Table 8: 2005 Water Audits
units of water per billing cycle in the summer and 20 Description Number
units in the winter. For the calendar year 2006, UCO
sent out 1,806 letters to customers with high water Toilet Leak 156
use. Based on the data analyzed from 2003 through Excessive Irrigation 332
2006, this program is conservatively saving an Irrigation Leak 125
average of 100 acre feet of water per year. Service Line Leak 38
The water audit programs often reveal problems Leak @Meter 28
which are then corrected by the property owner and results in lower water use and
reduced water bills. The most common problems experienced by customers is
summarized in Table 8. A total of 3,143 contacts were made by the UCO, either by
letter,telephone or direct contact during 2006.
Water Budgets for Irrigation Accounts
There are 363 active dedicated landscape (irrigation only) meters in the City. Since 2004,
approximately 148 water budgets have been developed for these accounts. A water
budget is created by measuring the area of a landscape by plant type (i.e. turf, shrub, etc.)
and calculating the amount of water it would need if efficiently irrigated. This is
accomplished by using the City's GIS as a mapping and measuring tool and software
developed by Cal Poly to calculate the landscape water needs.
When the actual water use on the account is 'greater than the calculated water
requirement, a letter is sent to the customer offering a landscape water audit free of
charge by UCO staff. In 2006, 69 budgets were sent to high use customers, offering the
complementary water use audit. Three audits were requested and completed from this set
of accounts.
Budgets have been developed for about 40% of the irrigation accounts that have
significant water use. The next phase of this project will be an evaluation of the
cl,
ATTACHMENT 1
2007 Water Resources Status Report
Page 9
effectiveness of this multi-year endeavor in meeting our goals of more efficient water use
by our customers.
Milted Use Commercial Landscape Water Budgets
These customers are defined as commercial properties with a single water meter which
measures both indoor and outdoor water use. There are approximately 200 accounts that
meet this definition in the City. To date, 41 water budgets have been developed for these
customers. Establishing irrigation budgets for these accounts is especially challenging
since staff must estimate the indoor use for the facility in order to calculate the outdoor
water budget. Staff is in the process of systematically evaluating each of these customers
to determine the method and approach for providing technical assistance to this group.
Public Information & Education
In our ongoing effort to educate the public on efficient resource utilization, the Utilities
Conservation Office provides informational brochures on a variety of water and energy
conservation, and recycling topics upon request. Additionally, Utilities Department staff
produces a quarterly newsletter which focuses on current information regarding water,
wastewater, storm water and solid waste issues. Additional information has been
distributed through paid media advertising and public service announcements (Sammy
the Steelhead and family) and participation at Farmer's Market, home shows, etc. The
current emphasis in the water conservation program's information and education
campaign is efficient irrigation practices and new irrigation technology.
In addition to the above programs, in 1999 the Utilities Department implemented a water
education program within San Luis Obispo Coastal Unified School District. The program
targets third and fourth grades, to compliment the study of water within the school district's
existing curriculum. Teachers have been enthusiastic about the program, particularly with
the field trip to the Water Reclamation Facility.
During the 2006-2007 school year, 11 class presentations and 12 field trips were given for
schools within the city. The class presentations were 45 minutes and covered the subjects
of. Water Cycle, Water Treatment, Water Use, Water Conservation, and Water
Reclamation. The classroom presentation is a prerequisite for the field trip.
The Department's hope is that the conservation education programs are lively, fun and
interesting, so that the teachers will continue to want to use the presentations, water
education toolkits and tours as a way of enhancing their current water education
curriculum. Instilling water awareness in children leads to increased parental water
awareness. It also positively affects future generations: these students are tomorrow's
adults and they will have the information to make informed and appropriate decisions
about water. A new water quality module has been developed and is currently in beta
testing in the schools,. This will add another option for teachers to select when looking
for water education activities, It is anticipated that this module will be completed in time
for the upcoming 2007-08 school year.
2007 Water Resources Status Report ATTACHMENT I
Page 10
Other Program Highlikhts
Residential Irrigation Pilot.Program
UCO staff is currently conducting a pilot program to test the efficiency of the latest
innovation in sprinkler technology, nozzles that tum a standard sprinkler head into a
precision device that can water your landscape better using less water. These nozzles
shoot multi-trajectory, rotating streams that apply water more slowly and uniformly than
conventional sprays and rotors, especially when adjusted for specific site conditions. In
addition to reducing water use, the water jetting from these nozzles is more resistant to
wind, less likely to mist, and significantly reduces run-off on to streets and sidewalks.
Once the pilot program is completed and the results are verified, the UCO will offer a
financial incentive for the replacement of the common spray head with these devices.
The amount of the incentive will be based on the projected water savings.
Large Landscape"Smart" Irrigation Controllers
Smart Controllers for irrigation work on a simple principle: provide the appropriate
watering schedule, adjust for weather changes and irrigate based on the needs of the
landscape.
There are a variety of weather-based "smart" controllers available for commercial
applications. In recent studies, Smart Controllers were able to avoid over-watering and
excessive run-off by scheduling the amount of irrigation based on the type of landscape
and current weather conditions. Statistics show that as much as 50% of commercial
water is used for irrigation. In many cases, by installing a smart controller, over-irrigation
and excessive run-off could be avoided while enhancing the health and beauty of the
landscape.
A pilot program to test the effectiveness of Smart Controllers in the City will be
implemented this summer (2007). The target customers will be Home Owner
Association's and commercial properties with large landscapes. Based on the results of
the pilot program, staff will determine the appropriate financial incentive to be offered in
the future based on water savings achieved.
Future Water Conservation Programs
Because of the City's affiliation with the California Urban Water Conservation Council
(CUWCC), valuable information regarding water conservation program development and
implementation is available. Most of the nation looks to California, and more
specifically to the CUWCC and the BMP's when developing water efficiency programs.
Given this fact, the City's water conservation program uses the CUWCC information to
determine if the implementation of a new program will provide dependable water savings
in a cost effective manner. The CUWCC, through its sub-committee process, compiles a
list of potential BMPs for evaluation and future implementation. The measures being
evaluated at this time are:
2007 Water Resources Status Report
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 11
1. Residential dishwashers
2. Vehicle wash systems
3. Synthetic turf
4. Residential hot water distribution systems
As more information and studies are made available, staff will be evaluating the results
and make recommendations for implementation in the future programs.
Summary
The water saved through the Water Conservation Program, historically, has been the
lowest cost option when looking at new sources of supply. The City has implemented
numerous programs over the years which have resulted in a dramatic decrease in per
capita water use. When evaluating the potential yield from a new conservation measure,
it is very important to factor in the reliability of the program to achieve the estimated
savings. As previously mentioned, the Council added 120 of to the Safe Annual Yield in
2006 based on the water use reduction associated with the intensified water efficient
landscape irrigation and commercial sector programs. After reviewing all the monitoring
data and information for 2006, staff is confident that the 120 of is being achieved. On an
ongoing basis, staff will continue to monitor these programs from a reliable saving
perspective each year to ensure the appropriate level of savings is being attained.
As previously stated, numerous studies statewide are currently underway which are
evaluating new water conservation technology. Advancements in irrigation technology
equipment appears to be the next major source of water savings.
The strategy at this point is to continue to focus on proper irrigation scheduling and
upgrading poorly designed systems, then as more information is available relative to the
effectiveness of new technology, it could be considered as a new program. Staff will
continue to monitor new and up and coming water conservation technologies and make
recommendations to the Council at the appropriate time.
.r-/7
2007 Water Resources Status Report
Page 12
IV.WATER SUPPLY STRATEGY TO MEET FUTURE NEEDS
The City of San Luis Obispo is currently pursuing or expanding our use of multiple water
supply projects/strategies to meet the projected community needs based on the policies
contained in the General Plan and related Elements. Based on the General Plan build-out
population of 56,000 and
the per capita water use Table 9: Primary Supply Requirements (acre feet)
rate of 145 gpcd, the Safe Annual Yield Required at Build-out 9,096
projected demand at full Current Safe Annual Yield(2007) 7,720
build-out is 9,096 acre feet Additional Safe Annual Yield Required 1,376
per year (afy). Table 9
shows the primary water Siltation (2008 to 20025) 180
supply requirements based Total Water Supply Requirement 1,556,
on the adopted policies to
meet General Plan build-out. The Water Management Element policies identify that any
water available above that needed to serve build-out will be for secondary water needs
(future siltation, loss of a supply source, etc.) and will not be made available to serve new
development above adopted General Plan build-out.
The Water Reuse Project was completed in May of 2006 and recycled water deliveries
began shortly thereafter. This past year, approximately 9 acre feet of recycled water was
used for irrigation purposes. It is anticipated that approximately 130 acre feet will be
used to offset potable demand in 2007/2008. Additional yield will be developed from the
reuse project as development occurs in the southern portion of the City. In addition, the
Water Reuse Master Plan has identified opportunities to systematically expand the use of
recycled water.
The Nacimiento Project has required significant City staff involvement over the past
several years to move the project forward. As the Nacimiento Project moves into the
construction phase, it is anticipated that City staff resources and involvement will be
reduced. The primary areas of focus for staff in the next several years will be:
commission meetings, oversight of construction issues and related costs, and other related
project issues. The City will continue to dedicate the staff resources necessary to
complete this important water supply project.
The third area of focus will be to continue to improve our conservation efforts. Efficient
use of our resources extends the availability of our water supplies and has proven to be
very cost effective. As part of the 2003-05 Financial Plan, the Council endorsed an
expanded water conservation program to achieve long-term water reductions. Efforts to
date indicate an additional 120 of of water savings have been achieved through the
expanded water conservation programs. In addition, as new technology or information
becomes available in the future, the City needs to continue to evaluate the potential for
conservation strategies to reduce our demand for, and efficient use of, water.
ATTACHMENT 9
r ;
2007 Water Resources Status Report
Page 13
With the successful completion of the Nacimiento Pipeline Project, expansion of the
Water Reuse Project and continued efforts associated with improving water efficiency
within the City, the City of San Luis Obispo will be able to meet the City's primary and
secondary water needs as identified in the General Plan and related Elements.
V. PROJECTED WATER SUPPLY SITUATION
Reservoir Storaze Curve
The Reservoir Storage Curve is integral to the City's annual water plan analysis. It is a
computer model used to estimate the City's future reservoir storage based on historical
drought weather patterns, water use projections, reservoir data and available groundwater
supplies. The model is used to forecast the City's water supply position and to make certain
water policy recommendations. The model also assumes implementation of Stage I
conservation when supplies are projected to last only three years. Stages II and III
conservation measures are implemented when water supplies are estimated to last only 2
years and 1 year,respectively(as shown on Figure 5). The curve has been updated to reflect
the City's current water storage and the policies contained in the Water Management
Element of the General Plan.
The model predicts current water supplies would last until February 2013 (Figure 5), under a
set of assumptions that represent the average weather conditions during the worst four years
of the drought period from 1986-91.
VI.SUMMARY
This past years rainfall was significantly below average for our area. Even with the low
rainfall, the City's surface water supplies from Salinas and Whale Rock Reservoirs are
still relatively good. Even with these available supplies, the City needs to continue pursuit
of additional supplemental water supplies to meet the goals of the General Plan. Based on
the cost projections for developing new water supplies, it is evident that water conservation
will continue to be a crucial element of the City's water resources planning in the future.
With the multi-source water policy, a number of supply projects under development, strong
water conservation program and other related policies which were adopted as part of the
W.M.E.,the City is pursuing a direction which will create a reliable supply of water to meet
the current and future needs of the community.
Attachments:
1. Definitions & Information
2. Figures 1-6
ATTACHMENT 9
Definitions & Information
Safe Annual Yield:
The maximum quantity of water which can be delivered from the water
source each year during a critical dry period(i.e.historical drought period).
Acre Foot:.
* 1 acre foot = 325,851 gallons
* Enough water to cover a football field with 1 foot of water
* Enough water to serve approximately 3.5 average single family homes (in San Luis
Obispo)per year
Gallons per Capita per Day(gpcd):
Calculation= Total Acre Feet x 325,851
City Population x 365
Present Water Demand(acre feet per year):
Calculation= 145 gpcd x Current City Population x 365
325,851
Salinas Reservoir:
Maximum Storage Capacity=23,842.9 acre feet
Minimum Pool=storage amount when water extractions must cease=2,000 acre feet
Surface Area=730 acres
Drainage Area= 112 square miles=71,700 acres
Whale Rock Reservoir:
Maximum Storage Capacity=40662 acre feet
Minimum Pool =storage amount when water extractions must cease=2,000 acre feet
Surface Area=594 acres
Drainage Area=20.3 square miles= 13,000 acres
ATTACHMENT I
Inches of Rain
O C!i O Vi O Cn O O LA
/ 15.68
98/99 T" 14.23
16.34
% 22.89
99/00
12797
18.93
00/01 126.86
.53
O1•
11.84
r� 01/02 13.12
15.94
�] //,, 14.54
e 02/03 21.21
22.91
® 03/04 11.79
2.83 �.
Pur. 16.08
04/05 33.55 39. 2
140.0 9
20.68
05/06 I 7.48
30.35
7.65
06/07* 8.49
10.49
w
1. O ?y /n ►.t
O
o O qQp
7
r
- ATTACHMENT I
Acre feet.
O Ln O Ul O Ln O
Jan-00
Apr 00
Jul-00
Oct-00
Jan-01
Apr-01
Jul-01
Oct-01
Jan-02
Apr-02 O
Jul-02
i.r
Oct-02 N
Jan-031i ® G
® Apr 03 �.. —,,. ® =
Jul-03 O �+
Oct-03 mmb
Jan-04
Apr-04 rpy
Jul-04 C
Oct-04
n
Jan-05
Apr-05 O
Jul-05
Oct-05
Jan-06
Apr-06
Jul-06
Oct-06 --
Jan-07
w.
Apr-07
�-i
CD
N
Gallons/Person/DayATTACHMENT 1
O O O O O O O O O O O
co
co
co -. .. V
co CT
co
CO
1
co
O CO
co
1 VI
N (D
coOD
O
W W �y
CD
cLn
c
UI
aco - - -
W
co
00 A qq
i a
O _ N
O A
1 1
N N
1
W j
O N
A W
O N
cn N
1
W W W W W A A- A A A A A
_CJt O V co CO O 1 N W A cn m
O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O
0
Population
n
I�
W
Acre FeetATTACHMENT I
1 N W A CT O) �--I CD CO
CD O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O
O __.- _... . . V
V CO
-_ CO
v
CO CO
CD
i
O
Ln
A A
j
O CD
07
A
t0 O
j A
A
CO
N s
O)
tTt
OO
W O
CD
ACA
p C)7 q
_... _._ _ _... CA
CO -4 060
CD
m _ CD
N
C D CD qqqq
C7 -+
CD
CD J
- a
O r
N
J CD
OD
N O
W
N
CT
O CO
W O
CO .
? fV
CD
- O
O C
W CO
CD .
CR
O CO
W CO
CD
W W W W W A A ? A A A A
CT Q) v CD CO O 1 N W p. C)1 0)
O O O O O O O O O O O O
a O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O o
Population
� w
w
n Q�Q
C �y
�`-a2y
Acre Feet ATTACHMENT 1
i N N W W A A CJ1
V7 O C71 O 01 O Ul O 671 O
O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O
Jul-03 '
Jan-04 ;
• �i r
Jul-04 • "
: CI � .
• 3
Jan-05 ; c
. 0
; a
Jul-05
,
�a /
r
Jan-06 ' m r
. m
Jul-06 ,
,
• r
Jan-07
r
Jul-07
Jan-08 C
Jul-08
Jan-09 N �
r
Jul-09 m m
0
o
Jan-10 3 w �,•
Jul-10 m m C
o
• n o
Jan-11 0
: N
m
Jul-11 m
• m
• w -
e oo<
: 3
Jan-12 :
Jul-12 Cr
C
m
Jan-13 N
0
J
Jul-13 G'
I ' ITI
(D
o CD
ATTACHMENT I
Acre Feet
0 0 0 0 o c 0 0
x,99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
S
f9
9)
j9
99
�O
Of
1?00 C
1?pF915,
b �.
20, �' D
n
r a o
°ff
wet 2°fes
2p
fs
C C
2°V9 R�
1802
s
X02
,p
�9
CA A W N N 1w
cr'i m w c p. ►� fD
3 g CD o• a n o a v b a.
0
a
c
CD
00
o CL ti d
< y '� (D CD
�ti' N �fD CD Q
.-. �• In ' � V Y
LA ,Cp_,
a � °g ano d CD
a
council M..finNk
�y Dov
j acEnba izEpont
C I T Y OF SAN LUIS O B I S P O
FROM: John Moss, Utilities Director
Prepared By: Gary W. Henderson, Water Division Manager
SUBJECT: WATER SUPPLY RELIAB=Y RESERVE
CAO RECOMMENDATION
Consider the modification or elimination of Policy 4.0 of the Water Management Element
relative to the reliability reserve.
REPORT IN BRIEF
The cost implications associated with the policy to develop a 2,000 acre foot (af) reliability
reserve were recently discussed during Council's adoption of revised water impact fees on March
12 and April 2, 2002. In addition, the per capita use (145 gallons per person per day) figure was
also discussed since the figure directly impacts the amount of water that the City needs to
develop to meet General Plan build-out. These two related issues drive the amount of water that
the City needs to develop, and have potentially significant fiscal and other related impacts.
The reliability reserve was first proposed in 1990, prior to the end of the most significant drought
period experienced by the City during the historical record from 1944 to present. At the time of
Council adoption of the policy,.there was no analysis of the value of the reserve (level of
protection provided) or the long-term fiscal impacts. The recent analysis undertaken to answer
these questions revealed the following key points:
1. The estimated cost for developing additional water supply projects has increased by
almost 3 times, which would result in an annual cost of $3.1 million for the 2,000 of
reliability reserve. (Page 3 of the report)
2. The issues associated with developing one or more water supply projects to provide for
the reserve include environmental impacts as well as fiscal impacts. (Page 3)
3. Since approximately 80% of the reserve would be for existing water customers, it is
estimated that a 21010 rate increase (or higher if project costs increase in future) would be
necessary in the future to fund the reserve. (Page 3)
4. The reliability reserve would at best provide 12 months of additional water supply
during drought conditions. To achieve the additional 12 months would also require the
City to use the 2,000 of from the new water supply source each year and "bank" water
(i.e.reduce amount taken from) in Salinas and Whale Rock Reservoirs. (Page 4)
Council Agenda Report—Water Supply Reliability Reserve
Page 2
5. Other than the 1986-91 drought, there is no other drought period since 1944 that would
have required use of the reliability reserve. (Page 4)
6. The City's adopted Water Shortage Contingency Plan and the difference between actual
water use and the water use factor of 145 gpcd provide a level of protection for future
water shortage periods which is roughly equivalent to that provided by the reserve.
(Page 5)
With the significant cost implications, relatively low level of protection and limited number of
times when the reserve would have been necessary, staff recommends that the Council consider
elimination of the policy for developing a 2,000 of reliability reserve. Staff would recommend
maintaining the 145 gpcd planning figure to provide the.buffer for water planning purposes. The
actual water use has remained well below the 145 figure and has been accomplished by the water
conservation awareness and water efficient hardware retrofits that the community has
accomplished. This buffer has already been achieved by our,customers and would not require
any rate increases associated with the reliability reserve, which were noted above.
DISCUSSION
On March 12 and April 2 of 2002, the Council discussed and adopted revised water impact fees
based on the improvements identified in the Water System Master Plan and updated costs
associated with new water supply projects. As discussed at these Council meetings, two factors
that have a significant impact on the amount of water that the City needs to develop are the
"reliability reserve" and the adopted "water use" figure of 145 gallons per person per day (gpcd).
This report will discuss these two interrelated issues and potential modifications that Council
may consider. Since these policies are included in the Water Management Element of the
General Plan, any modifications will require public hearings before the Planning Commission
prior to hearings before the City Council for adoption.
Reliability Reserve.
Why was the reliability reserve originally established? To address the problems associated
with determining safe annual yield and unexpected conditions affecting the safe annual
yield. The idea of establishing a water supply reserve first came forward during the drought
period which began in 1986 and ended in March of 1991. At the Council's request on April 2,
2002, staff researched information from this earlier time period to determine the reasons and
justification for the 2,000 acre foot reserve figure. The first reference to the reserve was
identified in a November 27, 1990 staff report titled "Water Supply Status and Development".
This report covered numerous water supply projects being-pursued at the time in light of the
severe drought that the City was experiencing. One paragraph in the report discusses the reserve
(which was originally referred to as a"planning reserve") and the full text is shown below:
"The City has experienced problems with safe annual yield determinations in the past.
Changes may occur in the future due to "live stream" requirements, new hydrological
data based on the current drought, and changes in water rights law, etc. For theses
X��0
Council Agenda Report—Water Supply Reliability Reserve
Page 3
reasons, it is prudent to have a planning reserve of additional water supplies to account
for future unexpected conditions. Staff recommends the City develop an additional 25%
increase, or about 2,000 of of its safe annual yield as a planning reserve."
As far as staff can determine, there was no technical basis (i.e. it would provide an additional X
years of water supply through the worst drought) for the 2,000 acre foot figure. It should be
noted that this goal was identified prior to the end of the drought. Following the end of the
drought, staff updated the City's safe annual yield computer model to include this new drought
period which resulted in a reduction of the projected safe annual yield that is available through
the coordinated operation of Salinas and Whale Rock Reservoirs. The City's current water
availability is based on this revised safe annual yield analysis and also includes estimated
reductions due to siltation at both reservoirs.
Following numerous public hearings, the City Council adopted the City's Urban Water
Management Plan (UWMP) on November 15, 1994. Policy 2.4 which identified the desire to
develop a reliability reserve is shown below:
"In seeking and accounting for new water supplies, the City will strive for a "reliability
reserve" of 2,000 acre-feet safe annual yield(about 20 percent of projected future water
demand at full build-out)."
At the time that Policy 2.4 was adopted, the Salinas Reservoir Expansion Project costs were
estimated to provide additional water supplies in the range of$500 to $600 per acre foot. These
costs are approximately one-third the current cost estimates for additional water from the
Nacimiento Project. The cost for the 2,000 of reliability reserve has increased from $1 million .
per year to $3.1 million.
What issues have changed since the policy for a reserve was originally envisioned by the City
Council? The City has revised (lowered) the safe annual yield estimates for Salinas and
Whale Rock Reservoirs based on the 1986-91 drought period. In addition, the estimated
cost for additional water supply projects has nearly tripled (and may be higher in, the
future). The policy for the reserve was made without an analysis of the value of the reserve
(level of protection provided) or the cost impacts (currently projected at $3.1 million per
year for the reserve).
What are the implications associated with developing the reliability reserve? The issues
include environmental considerations, multiple projects being pursued, and fiscal impacts.
The 2,000 acre foot reliability reserve represents approximately 53% of the additional water
supplies currently being pursued to meet the policy and build-out water demands of the City..
The development of additional water supplies, depending on the source, will have some level of
environmental impact associated with the project. With the large amount of additional water
supplies currently being pursued, multiple projects may be necessary to develop the projected
amounts. In addition, as discussed in detail at the March 12, 2002 Council meeting, the
reliability reserve will have significant cost implications to both existing water customers as well
r-
2-
Council
Council Agenda Report—Water Supply Reliability Reserve
Page 4
as new development. Since approximately 80% of the reserve is to serve existing customers, it is
currently estimated that a rate increase of approximately 21% would be necessary to pay for
existing customers portion of the reliability reserve. The other 20% of the costs for the reliability
reserve are included in the revised water impact fees for new development which were adopted
on April 2, 2002 (new fees take affect on July 1, 2002). If the Council chooses to reduce or
eliminate the reliability reserve, the projected 21% water rate increase for existing customers
would be reduced or eliminated. In addition, the water impact fees for new development would
be reduced slightly associated with the elimination of their share (20%) of the reliability reserve.
What level of protection does the 2,000 acre foot reliability reserve provide to the community if it
were obtained? The reserve could provide up to an additional 12 months of water supply
during water shortage period as discussed in more detail below.
The level of protection that the reliability reserve would provide has never been clearlyanalyzed
or evaluated. Opinions throughout the community relative to what the reserve should provide
would likely range from "it would never require the community to enter mandatory rationing
again" to "it will provide a buffer for a non-rainy day".
In an attempt to answer this question, staff used the computer model that was developed to
analyze the safe annual yield available from Salinas and Whale Rock Reservoirs to run various
scenarios if the 2,000 acre foot (af) supply had been available to the City for the past 56 years.
The computer model uses historical data from 1944 to 2000 and various assumptions to estimate
what level of protection the reserve could have provided over this time period.
The analysis revealed that if 2,000 acre foot had been available each year during the recent
drought (1986-91) and assuming the City demand was equal to the current safe annual yield from
the two lakes, the City would have approximately 10 to 12 months of additional water supplies at
the end of the critical drought period. Attachment 1 and 2 graphically show the model
projections of water supplies in the reservoirs with and without the reserve (Scenario 1 is without
use of reserve). This assumes that the 2,0.00 of would be used every year during the drought
period. Since no one can be sure when the beginning of the next critical drought would occur,
the City would need to utilize the 2,000 of every year (under this scenario) which reduces the
amount that is taken from Whale Rock and Salinas Reservoirs. This essentially "banks" some
water in the two existing lakes.
Staff also analyzed other Table 1: Reliability Reserve Levels of Protection
scenarios to determine the
level of protection Reserve Used During Extension of Available Water Supplies
provided if the 2,000 acre Last 3 Years 6-7 months
foot reserve were used Last 2 Years 5-6 months
during the last 3 years of Last Year - 4-5 months
the drought, 2 years of the
drought, etc. as shown in
Table 1.
i'1 �'TT�Ci4{M"rvr Z'
Council Agenda Report—Water Supply Reliability Reserve
Page 5
Would the City have needed to use the reserve other than during the 1986-91 drought? The
short answer is, NO. Staff simulated using the 2,000 of in the computer model only during the
controlling drought period from 1986 through March of 1991. The analysis indicates that at the
end of this drought period, the City would have had approximately 7,500 of in Whale Rock
Reservoir(approximately 10-12 months supply). Since the computer model goes back to 1944,
the results were evaluated to determine whether there was another drought period when there
would have been less than 7,500 of without the use of the 2,000 af. The results indicate that there
would have been one other drought period.that approached this amount without the use of the
reserve. This indicates that the drought period of 1986-91 was a very significant,critical drought
period surpassing any other drought period during the last 56 years as it affects the City's water
supply sources. In summary,the analysis would indicate that the City would not have needed to
use the reliability reserve for any period except the controlling drought in the last 56 years. At
today's estimated cost, this equates to an annual $3.1 million insurance policy that may be
needed infrequently and only buys an additional year's worth of water, at best.
If the reserve is reduced or eliminated, what other measures are available which can provide
protection to the City in future droughts? The City's adopted Water Shortage Contingency
Plan and the difference between the actual water use and the 145 gpcd planning figure.
The adopted Water Shortage Contingency Plan was not included in the analysis of the scenarios
discussed above. The Water Shortage Contingency Plan has three action levels that are triggered
when water supplies are projected to last 3 years or less. Implementation and achievement of the
identified water reductions during these events will extend available supplies from 9 to 12
months, depending on the City's water demand in the future.
More importantly, the second safety factor(discussed in more detail in the following sections of
this report) is the difference between the water use factor used for planning purposes of 145 gpcd
versus the actual water use. The goal is to continue to keep the overall community per capita use
rate well below the 145 figure. If the figure over the long-term can be maintained around 125 to
130 gpcd,this would represent a buffer of approximately 10 to 15%.
An additional area for consideration which may provide a certain level of protection would be
working with other agencies in the County to develop "mutual aid" type agreements to share
water resources during emergency periods. Cooperative use of the City of Morro Bay's
desalination facility(or expanded facility)could be an example of one such alternative.
If the Council decided to eliminate the reliability reserve, would the City Charter need to be
amended? The short answer is, Yes, for consistency purposes but not to adopt the change
in policy. In the November 1996 election, Measure P was placed on the ballot relative to the
reliability reserve. The voters approved the Charter amendment which added Section 909 as
shown below:
"As identified in the Water Management Element of the General Plan, the City shall
strive to acquire additional water supplies as a "reliability reserve" to protect the City
Council Agenda Report—Water Supply Reliability Reserve
Page 6
from future water shortages. Once the City has acquired a portion or all of the reliability
reserve, the additional water supply shall only be used to meet City needs during
unpredictable changes such as a new worst case drought, loss of one of the City's
sources, contamination of a source, or failure of a new source to provide projected yield,
and not to allow additional development."
The language above notes that the Water Management Element (WME) policy indicates that the
City shall strive to acquire a reliability reserve. This does not mandate that the City develop the
reserve, or how the City develops or achieves the equivalence of the reserve, but the reason the
City Council placed the language on the ballot was to insure that if additional supplies were
developed, it would not be used in the future for additional growth. The concern was that a
future Council, on a 3 to 2 vote, could change the policy. If the Council decides to eliminate the
reliability reserve policy, a Charter amendment should be undertaken to delete Section 909. Staff
does not believe that a Charter amendment is required for the Council to eliminate the reserve
policy in the WME but rather, to ensure consistency between the WME of the General Plan and
the City Charter.
145 gpcd Water Use Figure
The "water use" figure adopted Graph 1: Per Capita Use
in the WME received significant 200 T, do do CO
discussion during the A
development of the UWMP. a 150 W M m a N N N CO
Graph 1 shows the historic per4Mo o
capita water use since 1985. The a 100 °� ao
drastic reduction in the per capita c 50
water use during the drought was
achieved through public 0 0
education and awareness, rn rn rn C) rn rn (n o
monet penalties and related T TYearT `„
�' p
measures. Following the
drought, it was acknowledged that these extremely low rates could not be maintained over the
long-term and that there is a certain level of water needed to provide a reasonable quality of life
for residents, which includes water for landscaping and gardens. It was also acknowledged that
conservation is likely the least expensive source of additional water when compared to
developing new water supply sources,which it has proven to be.
While per capita use increased following the end of the drought up to 1997, the use appears to
have stabilized over the past several years. A number of factors can impact the per capita use
rate including, timing of yearly rainfall and the amount, population figure estimates from the
State which can fluctuate, and retrofitting that has been an ongoing requirement for new
development since 1989. It should be acknowledged that new development has been required to
retrofit to not only offset their expected use but at twice the estimated use (i.e. 2 to 1). The
mandatory retrofit requirement was eliminated as of January 1, 2002 based on the fact that the
majority of existing toilets have been retrofit. Using information from 1995 through 2001, staff
Council Agenda Report-Water Supply Reliability Reserve
Page 7
estimates that retrofitting existing facilities served by the City saves approximately 550 of per
year. If these retrofits had not been completed, the per capita use rate for 2001 would increase
from the 118 gpcd figure shown above to 129 gpcd. With the elimination of the retrofit
requirement, the overall per capita use figure may tend to increase as new development occurs.
Maintaining per capita use rates in the 130 gpcd range may be achievable but additional time is
be needed to insure use will remain at these lower levels.
There have been discussions of lowering the "water use" figure below the 145 level. Adopting a
lower per capita use figure, based on other policies in the WME, would immediately create
additional water for new development. If the figure were lowered to 140 gpcd, there would be an
additional 250 of available for new development at this time.
As noted earlier, maintaining the current 145 gpcd figure provides a buffer between actual use
and the planning figure of approximately 10-15%. Staff recommends maintaining the planning
per capita use rate at the current 145 gpcd as a buffer until such time as supply project options,
feasibility, and costs are evaluated and reviewed by Council in light of eliminating the reserve
requirement.
Summary
Based on the above discussions and the information presented in the March 11, 2002 Council
report relative to the cost implications associated with developing a reliability reserve and the
level of protection provided by the reserve, Council is being asked to reconsider the policy for
developing the reliability reserve.. If the reserve is eliminated, staff would recommend that the
"water use" figure remain at 145 gpcd. The elimination of.the reliability reserve will negate the
need for a rate increase for existing customers associated with the reserve. The difference
between the actual use rate and the 145 figure, that has been achieved through increased
conservation, would serve as the.buffer. The water that has been conserved by the community-
would
ommunitywould serve as part of the insurance policy without any additional costs or rate increases.
In addition, the adopted Water Shortage Contingency Plan will be implemented when supplies
are estimated to last 3 years or less which will extend available water supplies. If Council wishes
to revise the policies as noted above, the issues would be referred to the Planning Commission
and the brought back to the City Council for adoption as a revision to the Water Management
Element of the General Plan.
The modification or elimination of the reliability reserve will have a dramatic impact on the
amount of water that the City will need to develop from new sources of supply. Following
Council direction tonight, staff will return with a thorough discussion of the water supply
projects that should be pursued as part of the 2002 Water Resources Status Report on June 11,
2002.
�'33
J,
Council Agenda Report—Water Supply Reliability Reserve
Page 8
FISCAL IMPACT
Depending on the modifications made to the policies discussed above, there could be long range
cost impacts (increases or reductions) to both water rates and development impact fees. No
impacts are associated with this staff report since no formal action can be taken to modify the
policies without the full General Plan process.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Modify the 145 Water Use Figure and Maintain the 2,000 of Reliability Reserve..
Reducing the water use figure to 140 gpcd, for example, would immediately provide
approximately 250 of for new development based on existing Water Management Element
policies. This option would utilize part of the buffer already developed through conservation
measures and necessitate development of additional water supplies to provide a reserve. This
additional reserve (speculative) would require .future water rate increases. With the .
significant annual cost associated with the reliability reserve, the relatively low level of
"insurance" protection, and the projected rate increases for existing residents to fund this
protection level, staff would not recommend this alternative.
2. Do not modify either of the policies. This will require the City to continue to pursue an
additional 2,000 of of water supplies to provide for the reliability reserve. Assuming the
reserve is acquired from the Nacimiento Project at an estimated cost of $1,550 per af, this
will result in an annual cost to the City of $3.1 million. Based on the level of protection
provided by a 2,000 of reliability reserve, staff does not recommend this alternative.
3. Reduce the amount of the reliability reserve. The level of protection provided by a 2,000
of reliability reserve is relatively low. Any reduction in the amount of the reserve will only
reduce the level of protection provide. Staff does not recommend this alternative..
ATTACIIMENTS
1. Graph of projected water supplies during drought period without reliability reserve..
2. Graph of projected water supplies during drought period with reliability reserve.
3. Ballot Measure and analysis relative to the reliability reserve(November 1996)
Council Reading File:
1. "Water Supply Status and Development" Council Agenda Report dated November 27,
1990..
2. Minutes from November 27, 1990 City Council meeting. >/
.I
WAS]
• - _y-'r a r. :r� `;P•� '� Of:--l.
F� viw
"
MAW
i�.
� 1N aa�
�now
/
wx-j
�IlLG
u �.
NO rEtar�1
• "5- '" W1LI0
'wp
t wp r , MWe
el
u L� gg01131111
hr �rf ' of 1111
yy d
,. •s YR Y aq r MF -i1
• 7
rb
• 9F. "` F° L�'�-n'*°�1 ^''`�LL� t� � �1p�.� � 'n'i r�G� �1711�
"t
104
t
sAt�`�i`a
R `�, a 4t'C`u 3 � rt•�es �' i'°i 1 ,+$13v v M1S•70
ort/
.
xr ■•71YW�
rr4r'I1l
'� c +
NOW,
Il•L•-viral
• K ie� e� 5+�� y� R (tel .�1 }� i3" W.. t•N!
• 4r Y air is !�".+y �+'- �"c;.�, x-..?`E»n e W1719
WAXPI 61
_Wor
14111
• ,i$tt. �. .. �."."� �^ 8 P�� q�"c� 7 "�. ���yrr' � �:�Ela4�
• OX ySJ no
1
„
V
1
Will
M41
t-11u
' _ SILLY
• � ,y R €�� girl,
will,
�. MlNhaht
• e=r-E
<Ra
EFI'd"
'� .� �y � m' ■Ill17
WA III
1i '
MOLOVAY
WtE
1
_• k �y��y c�1 xarh�n �t�� , �, '�`f �tr�'�1' r rr-1�
. m1LaIJ
yx3 `iJe4 � � , a!"^ � a� "fir f",� :."t.�IIU1
J a ry r .'g . ; wllbLla lJ
'-1iT it GE
k
• 's^l. irk �� tg. ,� ,I e� a flfl fes. t+t2�`k^'�e P�� y y� �.:. �4•�
WS L..$'�5 i•3,{�^n i t tet-( "� .t'�'W � � r 7i1 +'il`M1 a tr �flrf.
m.luo
—
. WAVI t°LglI
rl�ala.
I1
• n1ATF� f Yj r '?A r` ��" nFa7"' "�^+, F
weL1.
WAVITAI
a
FULL TEXT OF MEASURE P FULL TEAT OF MEAS T" 'Llvr-ZF" M4 ,T 2
PROPOSED CHANGES PROPOSED CHAN(
(Showing Changes to Charter) (Showing Changes to L.__"
See'ion 909. Use of Water Supply Reliability Reserve. SECTION 406. Vacancies.
:entified in the Water Management Element of the General Plan. An elective office becomes vacant when the incumbent thereof dies,
the City shall strive.to acquire additional water supplies as a'reliabi'it' resigns, is removed from office under recall proceedings, is adjudged
reserve' to protect the City from future water.shortages. Once the insane, convicted of a felony, or of an offense involving a violation
City has acquired a portion or all of the reliability reserve,the additional of the Mayor or Councilmember's official duties, or ceases to be a
water supply shall only be used to meet City needs during unpredictable resident of the City, or has been absent from the State without leave
changes in water supply status such as a new worst case drought, granted by the City Council for more than sixty(60)consecutive days,
Loss
of one of the City's water sources, contamination of.a source, or fails to attend the meetings of the Council for a like period without
or failure of a new source to provide projected yield, and not to allow being excused therefrom by said body.
additional development. A vacancy in the Council shall be filled for the remainder of the
unexpired term, if any,at the next regular municipal election following
not less than seventy-two (72) days upon the occurrence of the va-
cancy, but the Council by a majority vote of its remaining members
shall appoint a qualified person to fill the vacancy until the person
elected to serve the remainder of the unexpired term or new term
takes office. If the term still has two (2) years until expiration at the
time of the next regular municipal election, the election to that seat
shall be separated from the election for the other Council candidates.
If the Council fails to fill the vacancy within (30) days following its
occurrence,.it shall call a special municipal election to fill the vacancy,
to be held not sooner than ninety (90) days or not later than one
hundred and twenty (42a}) fifty 150 days following the occurrence
of the vacancy. The election shall be governed by the provisions of
Article III.
A person elected to fill a council vacancy for an unexpired term
shall take office on the first Tuesday following his election. Notwith-
standing any other provisions of this Charter,a minority of the members
of the Council may fill vacancies on the Council by appointment in
the event that a majority of the Council seats becomes vacant.
IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS BY CITY ATTORNEY IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS BY CITY ATTORNEY
CITY CHARTER PROPOSITION CITY CHARTER PROPOSITION
MEASURE P MEASURE 0
In 1993 the City Council amended the Water Management Element Existing Charter Section 406 provides that the Council must fill a
of the City's General Plan to establish the objective of acquiring a Council vacancy within 30 days by appointment,and if an appointment
'water supply reliability reserve'to protect the City from future water is not made within that time period, to hold an election to fill the
shortages. In order to make it clear that such a reliability reserve vacancy not sooner-than 90 days nor longer than 120 days from the
shall not be used to allow additional development, and to require occurrence of the vacancy. However, it is not possible to hold an
voter approval of any change of use of the reliability reserve once election within 120 days and still comply with Stale Election Code
it is obtained, the City Council directed that this Charter amendment requirements concerning nomination periods and publication of the
be submitted to the voters. If approved, this amendment would add Notice of Election.This Charter amendment would extend the period
a new Charter Section 909 which limits the use of any water supply of time in which an election must by held for an additional 30 days,
refiabTty reserve which may be acquired only to maintain an adequate for a total of 150 days, so that the Election Code requirements can
City water supply during unpredictable changes in water supply status be met.
such as a new worst case drought, loss of one of the City's water
sources, contamination of a source, or failure of a new source to s/Jeffrey G. Jorgensen
provide projected yield, and not to.allow additional development. If City Attorney
approved, this Charter provision concerning the use of the water
supply reliability reserve may only be amended by a subsequent vote
of the people.
s/Jeffrey G. Jorgensen
City Attorney
NO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF OR AGAINST NO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF OR AGAINST
THIS MEASURE WAS SUBMITTED THIS MEASURE WAS SUBMITTED
��4 7
k� ,FJLe
MEETSWEM
2-AGENDA Z
• council mcmor�ae #._
May 10, 2002
FROM: Ken Hampian, City Administrative Officer/4—
Bill
fficerBill Statler, Director of Finance
John Moss,Utilities Director
SUBJECT: RELIABILITY RESERVE
In the May 14 Council agenda report recommending that the Council consider modifying the
reliability reserve, we note that eliminating it altogether would result in no need for a future
general-purpose rate increase forsupply purposes. It would also result in a reduced water impact
fee.
The following summary compares the assumptions used in impact fee analysis presented to the
Council on March 12, and the resulting fee per "equivalent dwelling unit" (EDU) adopted by the
Council on April 2, with, for example, the assumption of eliminating-the reliability reserve.
As reflected in this summary, the need for future general-purpose rate increases is essentially
eliminated; and the water impact fee per EDU (which is based on single family residences) is
reduced by$3,191 (from $11,256 to $8,065)with this changed assumption.
Water Supply Assumptions, Costs and Availability
At 3-12-02 Revised
■ Demand: Gallons per capita per day 145 145
■ Reliability reserve (acre feet) 2;000 0
■ Current population ' 44,613 44.426
■ Safe annual yield (SAY): Unadjusted for siltation " 7,735 7,790
■ Next supply cost after water reuse 1,550 1,550
■ Water impact fee (supply, treatment & distribution) $ 11,256 $ 8,065
■ .General purpose rate increase 21.5% 1.1%
■ New supplies needed 3,861 1,806
■ Current availability: Adjusted for siltation 1 273 304
* We just received our official State population estimate for January 1,2002. .
** The March 12 analysis incorrectly used the safe annual yield from the 1994 Urban Water Management Pian;it
has.since been adjusted by.55 aue feel.
As suggested by Council Member Ewan, we have developed the above spreadsheet for
presentation at the meeting to show the impact of changes in key assumptions (such as the per
capita use rate and amount of the reliability reserve) on water impact fees, general-purpose rate
increases, new supplies need and current supply availability. (These key variables are shown
above in bold italics:) This will facilitate "what if' discussions at the meeting. In the interim,
please call Bill Statler at x125 if you have any questions on the impacts of reducing the
reliability reserve.
G:Water and Sewer Impact Fees/Aduptiun of Revised Fees/Council Memorandum- Reliability Reserve � 1
I
council
j acEnaa uEpom
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
FROM: John E.Moss,UtilitiesDirecto
Prepared by: Dan G17more,UtITItI'es Engin
SUBJECT: WATER AND WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
POLICY AMENDMENTS
CAO RECONIMMATION:
Adopt a resolution amending certain policies contained in the Water and Wastewater Management
Element of the General Plan,as recommended by the Planning Commission.
REPORT IN BRIEF:
On February 10, 2004, Council considered finance and policy issues relative to the City's
participation in the Nacimiento project, and confirmed the City's allocation request of 3,380 acre-
feet per year(afy). On March 9,2004,Council directed staff to begin the process to modify certain
Water and Wastewater Management Element policies to ensure that the City's participation in the
project is clearly guided by the General Plan and is compatible with our most important community
principles including our growth management goals. This report presents recommendations for
amending several of the policies contained in the Water and Wastewater Management Element to
the General Plan (WME). Specific language for the proposed policy modifications was reviewed by
the Planning Commission at their meeting of April 28, 2004. The Planning Commission
unanimously supported the recommended language and corresponding amendments to the WME
policies presented herein.
DISCUSSION:
On February 10, 2004 Council considered policy and fiscal issues associated with the City's
participation in the Nacimiento project. The objective of that discussion was to reaffirm the City's
participation in the project and requested allocation. Council's action at that meeting was to direct
staff to return with recommended policy language relative to the City's participation in the project at
3,380 afy. Council directed staff to propose modifications to our policies relative to siltation,
reliability, and multi-source water supplies in order to ensure that the City's participation in the
project is clearly guided by the General Plan and is compatible with our most important community
principles,including our growth management goals.
On March 9,2004 the City Council considered recommended policy amendments and directed staff
to initiate the General Plan amendment process to modify certain policies contained in the WME
(a legislative draft of the proposed changes to the WME is included as Exhibit A to Attachment 1).
Council Agenda Report—Water and Wastewater Management Element Policy Modifications
Page 2
The recommended policy modifications are intended to clarify the Council's long range vision
relative to securing an additional reliable water supply for the community. Based on past Council
discussions,this vision includes:
1. Ensuring sufficient supply and system capacity to provide peak daily water demand
in the future.
2. Long tern planning for water storage losses due siltation.
3. Providing additional yield for other unforeseen conditions,such as drought or loss of
another water supply source.
The recommended changes to WME contained in this report will support this vision by delineating
the purpose of future water supply development, including the Nacimiento Pipeline Project, and its
relationship to the community's principles,including growth management goals.
On April 28,2004,staff presented proposed Water Management Element policy amendments to the
Planning Commission. The Planning Commission reviewed specific language for the modification
of the following WME policies:
• WME Policy 3.0 Water Demand Projections
• WN E Policy 5.0 Siltation at Salinas and Whale Rock Reservoirs
• WME Policy 6.0 Supplemental Water Requirements
• WN E Policy 7.0 Multi-Source Water Supply
• WME Policy 8.0 Allocation of New Water Supplies
The Planning Commission unanimously supported the recommended language for amending these
WME policies (the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of April 28,2004 are included as
Attachment 2). The specific recommended policy amendments are as follows:
WME Policy 3.0 Water Demand Projections
The current policies contained in this section are primarily directed at identifying a planning water
use rate for projecting the long term water demands of the City based on annual.average values in
acre-feet per year(afy), and using that same water use rate to determine our present water demand.
Council did not direct staff to amend the policy that sets our planning per capita water use rate.
However,one of the potential benefits of the pipeline project previously discussed by Council is its
ability to provide a third major supply source to ensure the City is able to meet our peak daily
demands with one of our other major supply sources off-line. This is an important concept in
providing reliable and adequate water service to the community. In review of the existing policy it
became clear that the-addition of a policy that would provide guidance for ensuring our capability to
meet not only our annual obligations,but our peak daily demands,would provide additional support
for participating in the pipeline project and strengthen our current policy relative to a key water
service factor,i.e.meeting our peak daily demands.
i
Council Agenda Report—Water and Wastewater Management Element Policy Modifications
Page 3
Recommendation-Add Policy:
3.1.5 Peak Daily Water Demand
The City shall strive to develop and maintain supplies and facilities appropriate to ensure
sufficim supply and system capacity to provide the peak daily water demand of the City.
Basis—This policy addition reflects the understanding that useldemand is variable with season and
it is necessary for the City to meet the peak daily demands of the community as well as the annual
average needs in order to provide reliable service to our customers.
WME Policy 5.0 Siltation at Salinas and Whale Rock Reservoirs
The current policy relative to siltation that occurs at our supply reservoirs identifies an estimated
amount of loss of Safe Annual Yield(SAY)at 10 afy and requires this amount to be subtracted from
the adopted safe armual yield figure on a yearly basis. This policy "accounts" for siltation, but
offers little in terms of planning for siltation into the future.
Recommendation-Amend Policy:
5.1.1 Accounting for Siltation
The City shall account for siltation in the adoption of the safe annual yield as identified in
Policy 1.1.2. The estimated annual reduction in safe annual yield from Salinas and Whale
Rock Reservoirs is 10 acre-feet per year. As Council considers and develops new supply
opportunities, Council should consider planning for additional water to address siltation losses
over a longer term.
Basis - Thi's policy change would continue to account for siltation, and, include guidelines for
planning for siltation over a longer planning horizon as new supply opportunities are considered by
the Council. A specific planning horizon is not recommended, since it is not fully possible to
anticipate all of the conditions,yield,etc. associated with future supply projects to be considered by
this and future Councils. .Those conditions may influence what the Council determines is an
appropriate amount or planning horizon for siltation at that time. Relative to the Nacimiento
project, this policy would direct that, upon initiation of project construction (which is when the
project yield is considered added to the City's supplies),the Council would determine what,if any,
amount of the project yield should be dedicated to future siltation losses.
WME Policy 6.0 Supplemental Water Requirements
The current WIVIE Policy 6.1.1 identifies that the City should develop additional supplies to meet
the projected General Plan build-out requirements and offset water yield lost due to siltation
(projected to 2025). This policy bases its determination of supplemental water supply needs
primarily upon the planning per capita use rate multiplied by a General Plan build-out population
figure. The policy does not recognize or address other possibly critical supply requirements needed
for service and reliability such as siltation beyond 2025,drought conditions, short or long term loss
of yield from an existing supply source, requirements associated with meeting peak operating
s5'—y�
r
Council Agenda Report—Water and Wastewater Management Element Policy Modifications
Page 4
demands, and other unforeseen conditions. The recommended modification to this policy to
identify Secondary Supply Requirements is very important in that it addresses these key service and
reliability issues.
Recommendation—Amend Policy:
6.1.1 Supplemental Water Requirement
The City shall develop additional water supplies to provide for the Primary Supply
Requirements identified below, and strive to develop additional water supplies to provide for
the Secondary Supply Requirements identified below, in concert with the consideration of
available supply opportunides.
1. Primary Supply Requirements - Develop supplemental water supplies to provide
sufficient water for General Plan build-out using the per capita planning use rate
identified in Policy 3.1.2 multiplied by the projected General Plan build-out population,
and
2 Secondary Supply Requirements — Develop supplemental water supplies to provide
additional yield to account for future siltation losses, drought, loss of yield from an.
existing supply source, operational requirements necessary to meet peak operating
demands,and other unforeseen conditions.
Basis — The recommended policy identifies supplemental water supply requirements to include
Primary Supply Requirements as those required to meet our General Plan obligations, and,
Secondary Supply Requirements as those that the City should consider in its service responsibility
to address requirements beyond providing for the annual consumptive needs of the community. The
recommended amendment places priority for the City's supplemental supply development and
recognizes the need to consider development of supplies (Secondary Supplies)beyond those driven
by General Plan population needs. The recommended policy does not establish an amount to be
considered adequate. That amount,or adequacy,would be a consideration to be made by Council at
the time they consider a supplemental supply project opportunity.
This policy recommendation to identify Secondary Supply Requirements differs from previous
policy for development of a "reliability reserve" in that it defines the Secondary Supply
Requirements in a broad sense and allows for their appropriate use over a broad range of conditions.
Additionally, it does not place the priority for their development above that needed to meet our
General Plan goals and does not quantify the amount required. That amount may be variable and
should be determined by Council based on a variety of conditions, either existing or future, and
should also be considered in the context of available supply opportunities.
WME Policy 7.0 Multi-Source Water Supply
The current policy 7.1.1 identifies the importance and value of developing and maintaining multi-
source water supplies to"reduce reliance on any one source of water supply and increase its (City)
supply options in future droughts or other water supply emergencies." This policy as written is
already supportive of the City's participation in the pipeline project. Council felt it would be
Council Agenda Report—Water and Wastewater Management Element Policy Modifications
Page 5
appropriate to strengthen this policy by including in the justification, the ability to provide for
meeting peak operational demands in the event that one of our other major supply sources is
unavailable.
Recommendation-Amend Policy:
7.1.1 Multi-Source Water Supply
The City shall continue to develop and use water resources projects to maintain multi-source
water supplies, and in this manner, reduce reliance on any one source of water supply, to
provide for peak operating demands in the event one of the City's major water supply sources
is unavailable, and to increase its supply options in future droughts or other water supply
emergencies.
Basis — This amendment to this policy places an additional and important parameter to consider
when reviewing the adequacy of the City's water supply resources.
WME Policy&0 Allocation of New Supplies
The current policy contained in this section identifies not only the priority by which new supplies
are to be allocated,i.e.first to eliminate any deficit between adopted yield and present demand,but
also provides policy for determining the amount of water available for new development,when new
supplies will be considered available for allocation, pre-1994 City boundary infill and
intensification requirements, accounting for reclaimed water and accounting for private water
supplies being used in the City.
In order to address growth related concerns with the development of water supplies beyond those
identified as required to meet General Plan population demands, this policy will prioritize the
allocationtuse of new supplies, and will determine how water available for allocation to
development is calculated to ensure that the amount of the City's water supply determined to be
available to new development is tied directly to the General Plan land use.
Recommendation-Amend Policys
8.1.1 Balancing Safe Annual Yield and Overall Demand
When new water sources are obtained, the additional safe yield shall be allocated first to
eliminate any deficit between the adopted safe annual yield (Section 1.0) and the present
demand as defined in Policy 3.1.4,second to eliminate any deficit between adopted safe yield
and General Plan build-out, and third to supply for Secondary Supply Requirements as
identified in policy 6.1.1.
Basis —This policy amendment expands the priority for which new supplies are to be allocated to
include meeting General Plan build-out needs and Secondary Supply Requirements. The first
priority—eliminating any deficit between adopted safe annual yield and present demand,has been
��13
4,� 3
Council Agenda Report—Water and Wastewater Management Element Policy Modifications
Page 6
satisfied and its basis stems from a time when the City's water use had actually exceeded its safe
annual yield. We currently have policies in place that would prohibit that from occurring as a result
of development. However,a new worst case drought or other loss of supply could redefine our safe
annual yield and again make this policy priority applicable.
Recommendation-Amend Policy:
8.1.2 Supplying New Development
The City will determine the water available for allocation to new development by either; the
adopted safe annual yield of the City's water supplies minus present demand as identified in
Policy 3.1.4, or the projected demand at build-out as identified in Policy 3.1.3 minus present
demand as identified in Policy 3.1.4; whichever is less. Available allocations will be assigned
to development in a way that supports balanced growth, consistent with the General Plan.
Allocations from a new water supply project shall be considered available at the time project
construction is initiated
Basis-This policy amendment provides assurance that if/when the City develops water to provide
for the Secondary Supply Requirements-identified in the proposed amended policy 6.1.1,its use for
development, beyond the current General Plan envisioned build-out, requires that the current
General Plan build-out be evaluated and modified first, based on its own merits and not driven or
limited by water supply availability. There will be no more water identified as available for
allocation than what is called for based on General Plan population and land use projections. This
assurance is seen by staff as an important policy needed to support the City's participation in the
pipeline project.
Summary
The policies contained within the Water and Wastewater Management Element to the General Plan
have received thorough discussion over the years and have been modified based on new information
or issues. The City needs to continue to review the policies to insure that they provide the
framework necessary to ensure adequate water resources for the City. The proposed changes will
provide the City additional policy support for participation in the project and strengthen our overall
water supply management and planning. The Planning Commission concurred with these
recommended policy amendments being valuable,with or without the Nacirniento project.
Amendment Consistency with the General Plan
The general plan is an internally consistent document,meaning that the policies and programs are
not mutually exclusive of one another. Internal consistency includes consistency between the text
and diagrams within the plan,consistency between the policies and programs in each element,and
consistency between the different elements. The proposed policy changes are consistent with the
rest of the General Plan. They will not result in any conflicts with other policies in the WME or
other elements of the General Plan.
Council Agenda Report-Water and Wastewater Management Element Policy Modifications
Page
Environmental Determination
Staff has prepared an Initial Study of Environmental Impacts for the proposed WME amendments
and is recommending a Negative Declaration. The initial study was approved by the Community
Development Director on April 12, 2004. The Community Development Director has determined
that the proposed amendments will not have growth inducing impacts, because the City allocates
water to new development based on the projected water demand of the City's buildout population,
which is listed in Table 2 of the Land Use Element. Water is not allocated to new development
based solely on the availability of supply. The proposed policies that encourage the development of
new water supplies cannot be seen as encouraging growth unless they are used as a basis or
justification for amending the City's projected build-out population. No such change is anticipated
at this time.
CONCURRENCE:
At their regular meeting of April 28, 2004, the Planning Commission unanimously supported the
recommended modifications and amendments to these Water and Wastewater Management
Element policies.
FISCAL IlVIPACT:
There are no direct fiscal impacts associated with the recommended policy modifications.
ALTERNATIVES:
Alternatives to Policy Modifications. Council may direct staff to initiate WME or other General
Plan policy amendments not identified above, or direct a revised approach to the recommended
policy amendments. Staff is comfortable that the recommended policy amendments will provide
the policy support necessary for the City to participate in the Project at Council's desired
participation level, and will'provide reasonable assurance that participation in the Project will not
become a growth inducement beyond that growth identified in the City's General Plan.
Attachments:
Attachment 1 —Resolution No. (2004 Series)
Attachment 2—Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting of April 28,2004
WCOU=1 Agmo-d RMOMOM ccuncd ADM&RepoMt nacim c=%N=V&M Policies CAR
�"-ys