Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/20/1989, I - CONSIDERATION OF MANDATORY WATER CONSERVATION te 12 s city of san lues oBispo March chNUMBER. 1989 ffECOUNCIL AGENDA REPORT • FROM: William T. Hetland, Utilities Director VrtY SUBJECT: Consideration of Mandatory Water Conservation RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that council review the material presented and direct staff appropriately. BACKGROUND. A. Descriotion of Current Water Situation Attached are a number of charts which show the current situation of the city reservoirs and water consumption. Those include: 1. Salinas Reservoir Level in Percent 2. Salinas Reservoir Total Storage 3. Whale Rock Reservoir Level in Percent 4. Whale Rock Reservoir Total Storage - City Share 5. Total and Individual Reservoir Usage 6. Water Usage Comparison 7. Annual Water Operational Plan Staff will review each of these curves at the meeting. B. Background and Current Water Status on Water Conservation and Rationing Attached is a memorandum from the City's Water Conservation Coordinator providing an update on water conservation activities that the City is pursuing. C. Preliminary Pr000sal for Mandatory Water Conservation Program A Council Agenda Report is attached which outlines staffs efforts in trying to develop a mandatory water conservation program. It identifies the criteria staff used and outlines four basic mandatory water conservation methods. Though additional work and public input is necessary before a final recommendation can be made, the staff is currently leaning toward method #4 Percentage Reduction with Seasonal Allotment with a lifeline allowance. D. Possible Curtailment of Develonment During Mandatory Water Conservation Program Attached is a staff report by the Community Development Department addressing possible options for the curtailment of development. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that council review the material presented and direct staff appropriately. water/wth OD CD co 0 406 -4 OD 0 ca C. Ica z (D Cfl CD ft4 X CC= co 3: copot, co 1 , m CD N h) W c Q Ch 0 cC. Q 1 : i CD co CD oil rfl j ® O i .................... ® p ....................... CD > . n i T! ffl m ; co mom CD � � o �CO) ca;..w m e co m n i k I 1 I �_3 m C m °D 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 C.> ; m IW co c ; f i J _l 'wtoo y i I 1 i i i W IW 1�,:///i•D /J GGVJJJ/L.I\NIIVVJJI'1111 oo � P C N GO z fn f � � '• i i i ; i ; j i 4 i I I i i i i \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\. ............................ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\1\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\� . s C r r — z /z .. n ---------------------------- m m _r N -bb WWON -bb O) WOtN46WWO > 0000000000000000 v C. r < IN IMMIROMM IMMUNE o g cn X z mcl) > m m W ® _ W 9100 RON IS z > o � � o ® 0 ate m Z UD m m O� > m 03: z ME m ca m o > CAm ch 0 � > A m C CD c z m mU 97' � m � za cn w w N 40 a► C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m a CU •� � '•` � 7 1 i i i � ff]y m M• i � � 1 � � i bra ol m m i s w 'V i •E i A m O w ; $ n �n . O ; � m m 0 ; C O a � toit � i CD i -a I A `% C � a i o� � GO t m CD i O m m N C0 C. ZOW m to I i 1 1 i i i 1 i i i 0 i t ; Z:- 7 i 1 A co O of O m O 0 O m O m V mCD r � g m m OO m 0 w �+ a < m z D m I m m W m m aD 0O ® CA o o ~ v c W W m 0 W m O . m O m >m — -� IM N m a OD CD � ~ cj)oC1 � — z W a W CO) O v W!=04 — C m 0 dD J CD O O� V O cobe - 0so 0 _ Q m Wo zCD C�m N ~ W 0I z0 Co 0 z m � a 1- -� 8 city of San luis oBispo 955 Morro Street • San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 22 February 1989 MEMORANDUM TO: City Council VIA: John Dunn, Administrative Officer FROM: Tina MetzgerrWater Conservation Coordinator SUBJECT: Water Conservation Update It has been approximately three months since my arrival as Water Conservation Coordinator. During this time frame a number of tasks and areas of concern have been identified. I now find that the time is appropriate for me to update you on the progress to date. . Staff has identified three areas which require attention. The following outlines our course of action. I. Public Relations Campaign. The campaign consists of the following: 1. Informational bill stuffer was included in both the January and February 1989 water bills. 2. The distribution of table tents to all area restaurants and cafes. 3. The incorporation of public service announcements (PSA) on both radio and television. The radio PSA's are on all radio stations in San Luis Obispo County. The television spots are still in progress. 4 . The publication of water conservation articles in the Mustang Daily, The Cuestonian, New Times magazine, BIA Update. 1 77 5. With librarian Joan Foster, we are establishing a water conservation section in the new City/County Library, with books, videos, pamphlets, magazines on water conservation methods. 6. We will provide the Chamber of Commerce newsletter a flyer on commercial water conservation methods. 7. We have set up an information table at Farmer's Market (Thursday night) twice monthly, to encourage water awareness, and answer any questions the public may have concerning water conservation. 8. We are working with Maggie Cox on ways to inform tourists of the need to conserve water while visiting 'San Luis Obispo. We have ordered attractive vinyl static decals for hotel/motel bathroom mirrors that .remind visitors to conserve water. . 9. Staff is in the process, of working with a local radio station in developing a San Luis Obispo Water Conservation Jingle. We are *looking to target- a number of markets, from students to the retired population. 10. Staff is participating in the Xeriscape Mini-Conference (Appropriate Landscapes for San Luis Obispo) , sponsored by . Obispo Beautiful, on March 16, at the City/County Library auditorium. 11. Staff is .continually working with undergraduate and graduate students on academic projects concerning water conservation. 12. Staff is developing signs for French Park and the Santa Rosa Street median to inform the public that the City is delaying planting in those areas until the drought is over. 13. We are distributing, on an almost daily basis, the remains of the 1986 C.A.R.E. retrofitting devices (sink aerators, low flow shower heads, etc. ) to those citizens requesting them. 14. Staff goes out into the field on all reports of water waste to check on the situation and to correct it. 15. Staff is involved in statewide water conservation committees and advisory groups. 2 'tiM t 14. We are in the process of developing a "Water Woman" education conservation program for local grammar schools. 15. We are preparing for Water Awareness Week, May 1-7 and are scheduling a program of events for the City's Water Fair on May 6 at the City/County Library auditorium. 16. Staff answers 15 - 20 phone calls a day concerning questions about water conservation. 17. At the public's request, water audits are performed at residences or businesses. II. The second area of concern is the Water Conservation Annual Operational Plan 1988-89. Based upon this plan, as water levels continue to decline, staff is required to take action at predetermined levels: Because we are approaching these levels, the following items are in progress: 1., The investigation, development, and implementation of a mandatory water conservation plan. 2 - The review, modification, and rewrite of the present water conservation ordinances and development of new and firm conservation ordinances as the City's water supply continues to decline into both servere and critical areas of the operational plan. . 3. The leak detection program, which began in October 1988 and ended in December 1988; surveyed 27.2 miles and found two leaks. . The program was disdontinued in favor of a more cost-effective water meter leak ;repair program. Since the beginning of January 1989 there have been 128 meter leaks repaired. III. The final area of concern is. the existing water conservation Five Year Plan. Staff feels that the Plan has a sound foundation, but to be more effective a review, modification and redirection must be undertaken. Staff will have a modified version by May of 1989. c: William T. Hetland; Utilities Director Allen Short, Interim Water Division Manager ETING city of san gats OBISPO Mara AT1989 9j;% COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER FROM: P PREPARED BY: William T. Hetland •Allen Shor Tina Metzge& Utilities DirectorwV Water Div. Manager Water Cons.Coordin. SUBJECT: Possible mandatory waterconservation methods for the City of San Luis Obispo RECOMMENDATION: Council to review and provide direction to staff. BACKGROUND: Based on the Water Conservation Annual Operational Plan 1988-89, staff is required to take action at predetermined reservoir water storage levels. Because we are approaching those declining water levels, preparation for an equitable Mandatory Water Conservation Plan has become necessary. The enclosed Mandatory Water Conservation Methods represent very. different ways to require reduced water consumption by San Luis Obispo citizens. All four methods would be supported by legal restrictions (ordinances) of varying degrees, and would allow for special exemptions on a case-by-case basis. Methods 2, 3 and 4 may incorporate a life-line allowance to protect those citizens who have already reduced their water consumption to the bare minimum. Based upon the public input process, and further direction and modification, a realistic achievable time schedule for implementation is in the process of development. The selection of a viable and appropriate Mandatory Water Conservation Plan should consider the following criteria: 1. Reduction in use of water by businesses and governmental agencies with as little danger of increasing unemployment or deteriorating individual businesses as possible. 2. Recognition of previous conservation efforts. 3. Equitable availability of water to householders for personal needs whether in apartments or single family residences. 4. A workable plan that imposes the least amount of additional cost on the conscientious and conserving customer. 5. Maintenance of landscaping at a "survival level"; depending on severity of required percentage reduction. The following outline describes the program elements for Mandatory Water Conservation. MANDATORY WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAM ELEMENTS I. Establish Overall Conservation Target (25%, 35%, 50%) II. Program Guidelines & Principles A. Legal Compliance B. Understandable to Customers G Equity Between Customers D. Ease of Administration E. Financial Impacts 1. Revenues 2 Staffing & Support Service Requirements III. Methods A. Legal Restrictions I. Alternate Day Irrigation 2. Wasteful Run-off (Gutter Flooding) B. Target Reductions 1. Per Capita. Allocations 2. Dwelling Unit Allocations 3. Percentage Reduction 4. Percentage Reduction With Seasonal Allotment 5. Other Equity Considerations a. Target Reductions by Class of Customer b. Lifeline Allowances C. Exemption Process for Hardship/Equity Situations IV. Sanctions/Incentives A. Sanctions for Non-Compliance With Legal Restrictions & Target Reductions 1. Financial Penalties Through Utility Billing System 2. Service Curtailment 3. Fines B. Incentives for Compliance 1. Free Consultation on Water Saving Programs/Modifications (Water Audit) 2. Rebate Program to Implement Water Audit Recommendations V. Implementation A. Effective Date for Conservation Target & Legal Restrictions B. Effective Date for Sanctions & Rewards WATER/MANWTREL .Z-/3 U� city of sAn X115 oBispo 955 Morro Street • San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 POSSIBLE MANDATORY WATER CONSERVATION METHODS FOR THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO Method 1: Individual fPer Capital Allocations The Per Capita Allocation Method provides that all residential occupants receive the same amount of water per day with some decrease in allocation as the number of residents increase in the living unit. Commercial/industrial consumption goal is calculated, for example, from the number- of employees, or number of seats in a restaurant, or number of hotel rooms. Advantages: This method provides equal distribution of water to all customers regardless of age or need. Disadvantages: The establishment of individual allocations would require that a census be made to determine the number of people in each living unit in San Luis Obispo. The accuracy of such a census may be open to question, especially when people feel they may be rationed in the future. The cost, time, and staff to complete a thorough City census must be taken into account. There is also a problem in obtaining this information because a large number of residences and multiple dwellings are billed to persons who own, manage, or operate property but do not reside on the property. The accuracy of responses to a census may be unreliable in that some apartment house owners may indicate full occupancy whether full at the time or not. There is the possibility that those who respond with accuracy will receive less water allocation than those who give false information. 1 T-�y , J Due to the large number of changes in occupancy during the year in San Luis Obispo, it would be a continuing problem to update census information. The number (rate of turnover) of clientele would not be taken into account in a business such as a restaurant. The Per Capita Allocation Method does not allow fora difference. in type of dwelling or landscaping. Customers without yards would receive the same amount of water as those with large landscaped areas. Dwelling units with laundry facilities would receive the same amount of water as units without laundry facilit+i+es. Method 2: Uniform Allocations Per Type of Dwelling Unit The. Uniform Allocations Per Type of Dwelling Unit Method provides a certain allocation for each type (such as single family home, apartment, etc. ) of living unit, regardless of the number of people in the unit. For example, a single family home may be allocated more water than an apartment. Usually, an additional allocation is provided each residence for irrigation needs in the summer months. Commercial/industrial allocations would be determined by the type of use, for example, a bike shop would not receive the same allocation as a small cafe. The allocation would be dependent upon the water requirements of each commercial use. Advantages: Individual homes would receive the same amount of water plus a set amount for irrigation needs creating a perception of equity. Multiple dwelling units would all be allotted the same amount of water per unit adding to the perception of equity. A census would not be required, thereby saving cost, time, and staff. Disadvantages: This method is inequitable to most customers. Occupancy -varies with each dwelling unit and water would not be apportioned equitably or to the needs of the customers. 2 1 Some customers would receive an allocation in excess of their normal needs leading to waste, and customers with large families may be required to reduce their consumption below that necessary for health, sanitation and safety. Dwelling units with laundry facilities would be allotted the same amount of water as those units without laundry facilites. Allotments must .be large enough to allow for an occupancy of three or four when there are only one or two occupants. It may also be necessary to increase a large number of individual allocations. As with the per capita method, this method cannot equitably distribute available water supplies, and makes conservation of supples more difficult. This method does not account for people's real needs. For example, with a type of commercial use such as a restaurant, this method does not account for the differences in numbers of clientele between two similar-sized restaurants. Method 3: Percentage Reduction Allocations The Percentage Reduction Allocation Method assigns each customer a consumption reduction goal as a percentage of the consumption level used in a similar .billing period during a normal season in a past year. That similar billing period for comparision could be the calendar year 1987. Commercial/industrial uses would also be assigned a consumption reduction goal as a percentage of the consumption level used in a similar billing period from a past year. Advantages The largest water users are reduced the most. No census is required, thereby saving cost, time, and staff. Variations in weather conditions within San Luis Obispo are taken into account. Variations in individual needs for laundry facilities and personal needs will be accounted for. 3 � � � Disadvantages: Some customers may receive allocations higher than similar customers because of their past water usage habits. The number of individuals in each dwelling is not directly considered. This method does not distinguish between indoor and outdoor water use. Method 4: Percentage Reduction With Seasonal Allotment Percentage Reduction with Seasonal Allotment Method is similar to the Percentage Reduction Method except that the consumption reduction goal is varied, depending on the time of year. Using a formula which calculates the difference between winter consumption (essentially inside water use) , and the summer increase in consumption (due to irrigation) , allocations are determined by reducing inside water use, for example, 10 percent and outside water use, for example, by 60 percent. Commercial/industrial use allocations would also follow this method. Advantages: The majority of water reduction would occur in irrigation use. No census is required, thereby saving cost, time, and staff. The largest water users are reduced the most. Variations in weather conditions throughout San Luis Obispo are taken into account. Variations in individual needs for laundry facilities and personal needs will be accounted for. Disadvantages: The number of individuals in each dwelling is not directly considered. Some customers may receive allocations higher than similar customers because of their past water- usage habits. 4 OTHER AGENCIES' RATIONING PROGRAMS San Francisco: The San Francisco Water Department is rationing their customers with Method 4: Percentage Reduction With Seasonal Allotment. Under this method, if a customer does not water outside the home, the customer has to cut back 10 percent. If the customer waters outdoors, that use must be cut back by 60 percent. This is determined by using the formula which calculates the difference between winter consumption, and the summer increase (due to irrigation) . Ten people worked on the water rationing plan. A temporary staff of 15 people is helping to implement it. Monterey: The Monterey Peninsula Water Management District gives its customers a choice between two methods: Percentage Reduction or Per Capita Allocation. A Monterey water customer may choose to reduce water use by 20 percent or more over from the same period in the base year from October 1, 1987 to September 30, 1988. Or the customer may choose to reduce water use to an amount equal to (or less than) the following "per Capita" amounts: Type of Number of Residents: _ Dwelling One Two or More Apartment/ 68 gallons 46 gallons per Townhouse/ per day person per day Condominium House 122 gallons 82 gallons per (Single Family Detached) per day person per day 5 /O For example: if a customer lives alone in an apartment, he can A) reduce water use by 20% over the same period in the base year, or B) use no more than 68 gallons per day. If a customer lives in a house with three other family members, he can A) reduce water use by 20% over the same period in the base year, or B) use no more than 4 X 82, or 328 gallons per day. Non-residential water users (includes commercial, government, industrial, etc. ) must reduce their water use by 20% over their base year water use (October 1, 1987 to September 30, 1988) . Businesses may request the optional baseline "per capita" ration. amount. It is based on 80% of the average consumption for the specific land use type. Businesses must then reduce their water use to no more than the baseline standard. For example: the baseline standard for a fast food restaurant would be . 0161 acre-feet per year, per seat in the restaurant. The Monterey Peninsula Water Management. District rationing program employs six full time people, along with a staff of .four field representatives and two people who process transfer of ownership retrofitting. Marin County: Marin Municipal Water District is considering implementing water rationing Method 3: Percentage Reduction Allocation. With this method, Marin County customers will be required to cut back 35 percent over the base period of October 1, 1986 to September 30, 1987. The mandatory water cutback will be the same for everyone, residential and commercial customer alike. Marin Municipal Water District water conservation office employs two public relations people, four landscape people, two part-time engineers, and contracts work out much of the time. 6 1 � l Goleta• The Goleta Water District is implementing Method 2: Uniform Allocations Per Living Unit. There are set allocations for each type of dwelling unit. Goleta Water District customers have been conservation aware for over fifteen years. This current plan is requiring a 20 percent reduction in water consumption in every account, both commercial and residential. The Goleta Water District employs five people in water conservation. 7 - ��� SOURCES Mandatory Water Rationing Program. San Francisco Water Department, Public Utilities Commission of San Francisco: Effective May 1, 1988. Robert Vasconcellos, Manager, Resources and Planning; San Francisco Water Department. J. Matthew Mullan, Water Conservation Administrator; San Francisco Water Department. Water Rationing Program. Monterey Peninsula Water Management District: Effective January 1, 1989. Michael Ricker, Water Demand Manager; Monterey Peninsula Water Management District. Ralph Holeton, Rationing Manager; Monterey Peninsula Water Management District. Stephanie Miller, Public Information Officer; Marin Municipal Water District. Larry Farwell, Water Conservation Coordinator; Goleta Water District. Drought Contingency Planning Guidelines for 1989. State of California, The Resources Agency, Department of Water Resources: January 1989. Urban Drought Guidebook. State of California, The Resources Agency, Department of Water Resources, Office of Water Conservation: March 1988. Water Conservation in California. Bulletin 198-84, State of California, The Resources Agency, Department of Water Resources: July 1984. 8 POSSE LE C RTALMENr tic DEVBOPNENT D F&G M4NDATORY WATER CONSERVATUN PROGRAM Current water-allocation policy and regulations Last summer the council adopted Water Allocation Regulations to help reach a better balance between normal water use levels and the amount of supply which the city can count on during dry spells. Adoption of the regulations followed a long discussion of how much more, if any, the community was willing to let normal water use exceed safe yield, and how quickly it wanted to regain a balance as new supplies were obtained. The regulations set an initial amount of about 232 acre-feet of water which could be allocated to development, even if no additional supplies were obtained. That amount was about three percent of last year's safe annual yield. Of that amount, about 206 acre-feet have been allocated to projects between July 1, 1988, (the start of formal water accounting) and March 1, 1989. The regulations also say that after crediting to a better balance the first 147 acre-feet of any additional supply obtained after July 1, 1988, one-half of the additional water supply will become available for development and one-half will go toward a better balance between use and supply. However, even with added supply, so long as normal use is above safe yield, the amount allocated to development in any year (July through June) cannot exceed two percent of safe yield. A project becomes eligible for a water allocation after all discretionary approvals have been obtained and a complete building-permit application is submitted. Water allocations are assigned as building-permit applications are received. If no water is available for allocation, the order of receipt determines a project's place in line for future allocations which may become available. The regulations set up the following four categories for water allocations. This is the status of each, under the current regulations, on March 1: Additional Allocation Category Allocation Available 3/1 - 6/30 Available after 7/1 General residential 6 acre-feet 85 acre-feet Affordable residential 18 acre-feet 15 acre-feet General nonresidential 6 acre-feet 52 acre feet Special' (Edna-Islay & use changes in ex. bldgs) none none TOTAL 30 acre-feet 152 acre-feet * (Projects which originally would have been eligible only for the special reserve are now eligible for the other categories.) The six acre-feet for general residential would allow about 16 houses, while the 18 acre-feet for affordable residential would allow about 80 apartments gr 70 condominiums. The six acre-feet for nonresidential would allow about 170,000 square-feet of downtown retail or about 73,000 square-feet of office development. The 85 acre-feet for general residential would allow about 220 houses. T-�2�- 1 J According to the current regulations, allocations are for specific projects at specific locations. They can be transferred between different owners of the same project, but not between projects. The amount of the allocation needed for a project is based on a survey of water use by similar types of development, in most cases over a five-year period. A project loses its water allocation if its building-permit application or its building permit expire due to at least six months with no action by the applicant. Water in one category which is not allocated cannot be reassigned to another, except for year-end transfers from the affordable residential category to the general residential category, which requires special action by the council. According to the regulations, these types of projects are exempt and do not need water allocations: Most remodels and additions; Projects providing their own water, Projects making two-to-one offsetting reductions in the water use of existing development ("retrofits"); Projects replacing existing development with something using the same amount of water or less. Also, the regulations allow a new water source to be counted toward safe yield before it actually delivers water, so long as the environmental review is complete, the council has approved construction plans, and the utilities director has determined that it could deliver water within one year. Under these criteria, and subject to the water regulations annual growth-rate limit, the five wells approved last fall would result in 152 acre-feet becoming available for allocation beginning July 1. Options Here is a range of options for deciding how much water should go to new development at a time when the city is considering mandatory conservation. 1. Take no action. The current regulations would remain in effect. Once the small remaining amount in this year's allotment is allocated (probably within the next few weeks), any further projects would have to wait until July to receive allocations. In July, 152 acre-feet would become available for allocation. 2. Reduce allocations for next year. The allotment otherwise available starting July 1 could be reduced to a smaller amount than now allowed, such as one percent of safe annual yield, which would be about 78 acre-feet. T -�3 J 3. Bar allocations during mandatory conservation. The council could add to the current regulations a provision barring allocations when mandatory water conservation is in effect. Staff recommends this approach. The following paragraph would do this. "Despite any provision of these regulations to the contrary, after [date] there shall be no allocation of water to development during any period when the city has in effect a mandatory water-conservation program." The cut off date would logically be between the soonest an urgency ordinance could take effect --the next few days-- and July 1, the soonest a substantial additional amount of water would become available for allocation. The council could, as exceptions, establish some allocations for projects determined to be particularly beneficial, such as affordable housing or downtown projects. Staff recommends that there be no exceptions. This approach would allow projects which have already applied for building permits to proceed. Projects which are exempt from the Water Allocation Regulations would be exempt from the moratorium. Under this approach, the remaining 12 acre-feet in the general residential and nonresidential categories will almost certainly be allocated. Eighteen acre-feet more would be allocated in the unlikely event we received a rush of applications qualifying for the affordable (low- or moderate-income) residential category. 4. Prohibit allocations until safe yield actually available at least equals normal use, and then allocate only the amount by which safe yield exceeds normal use. This would require amending the general plan Water and Wastewater Management Element and the Water Allocations Regulations.. (The immediate water-use implications would be about the same as in option 3.) 5. Do not issue permits for projects now in plan check. The city could stop issuance of building permits for those projects now in plan check and which have received water allocations (but not building permits) under the current regulations. Projects in plan check represent roughly 80 acre-feet of water allocations, and include about 200 houses, apartments, and condominiums, and seven commercial buildings. Going a step further, a moratorium could stop acceptance of applications or issuance of permits for the. minor projects which are exempt from the Water Allocation Regulations but which may slightly increase water use, such as additions of bathrooms. Staff assumes that.even with a full moratorium, projects with their own water supply, those making 2-to-I offsetting reductions of water use in existing development, and those having the same or lower. water use than what they replace on a site could proceed. Allowing such projects would not increase water use, and may decrease it. 6. Restrict discretionary permits. The five approaches outlined above all deal with building permits. The council could prohibit applications for or approval of discretionary planning applications: subdivisions, use permits, architectural review.- Staff believes that doing so would not help with the short-term water situation. Also, we would expect a glut of applications when the prohibition was lifted, and we would then need to sort out who could go first. Staff prefers to continue accepting planning applications for processing. We do recommend that each approved application include a clear condition --as we now have for subdivisions-- that approval does not assure water service. Environmental review The council must make an environmental determination to change the current Water Allocation Regulations or adopt a moratorium. An urgency ordinance could be considered exempt from environmental review as an emergency action. Staff believes that any of the options for adding to or amending the existing regulations could be covered by reference to the previous environmental impact report for those regulations, which evaluated the impacts of having no water to allocate. gm3: hotwtr 3-2-89 am TING AGENDA Colpestad DATE .=ITEM aryn M. St C 2250 Kung Sftd#21 Dmmtes ae ia+by Lead Penton San Luis Obispo,Catifania 93401 8QS543-IA4CfRespondbf gc and Afty rub. �M• IM•i�at t March 1, ]989 � Ir.It .00 Oam d1m i Allan K settle TT'. san suis cbispc city Ball Sart alis chispo, CA 93401 _ Dear Ommilmn Settle: samm tit mmomm Ram juarawn Rx s N Em It is with few and relief that I heard yaw plus to red=water ecrmnpticn within the dty.' Althotx;t I loath the tb=A cf water zatiatirg, amd all the :hl= eiiaues that s6aa fMM it, it wtu]d telae a fool not to xeali.ae we are literally nanirg cat of water. It that two ttopics, water ratLwA g and a,moabzitm cn rtew btnlding permits, axe to be cn.yaw agwxU. Please ]aaep in mind that altha 4i these FaLposed xestrictiarts will rut be .well renaived by cater, dw'p�,, b1sinesemm and m=V citizem, .tbey 4x8 sand actirus for the werall well-beirg of aw unity. I you fW takir9 this tar able, yet raeded, sb n=- I apport yet, and all of the a ailmen that aWc t you, an any acticns you find necessary to sttetdt aw niwlrxEjm wetter apply. Twig t times require t m#i.a&Jcm-. Sirrx rotY� MWw Man .OotmrAilWMM Pinard mmaniiwmen Fara Oarcilmen Reis r-. R.IEC E#V K to VAII *"COW , AMUMOgM4o A MEETING AGENDAaA ei(� i DATE " ' 89 ITEM # -� 1 C�•v--dam J--�.� b��(� � �/� .. 1 `j J1 tA�t17- Ana i 4J i Lac," Person RECEIVE © MA's OTY CLERK SANLUrSOSV*CA