HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/03/1988, 3B - WATER ALLOCATION REGULATIONS III��I�IIII�III�IIII I -MEEDA Q e
city or san tuts oBIspo 5s
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT 11M NUMBER:
FROM: Michael Multari, Community Development Director; BY: Glen Matteson, Assoc. Planner
SUBJECT: Water Allocation Regulations
CAO RECOMMENDATION: Review the EIR, draft regulations, and public, staff, and Planning
Commission comments. Give direction to staff concerning adequacy of the EIR and
desired approach for the regulations.
DISCUSSION
City water use exceeds safe yield of supplies. Over the next several years, expected
additional water supplies may not be enough to meet the needs of expected development.
Last February the City Council, by adopting the Water Management Element of the general
plan, set maximum acceptable levels of risk in exceeding the safe yield of water supplies
and called for regulations to help balance water use and supply. The Planning Commission
and staff had recommended draft regulations last spring. The council considered the
regulations in July and August 1987.
As directed by the council, an environmental impact report (EIR) has been prepared and
circulated for public review. This council meeting will mark the end of the EIR's public
comment period. The council must consider responses to the significant issues which have
been raised and certify that the EIR is adequate before adopting the regulations.
Under adopted policies and the proposed regulations, the current water situation would
lead to a moratorium. However, if new groundwater sources become available during the
year, the moratorium would probably last only a few nmonths. Since the disruption caused
by a probably short moratorium does not appear justified by the resulting small
improvement in supply/demand balance, staff has decided to recommend an alternate
strategy: allow a one percent increase in water use, with no further increases until
supplemental water is made available. This alternative will require redrafting the
regulations and amending the Water and Wastewater Management Element. Also, in reponse
to previous direction, staff is suggesting a special allocation for "pipeline" projects
such as the Edna-Islay Specific Plan area. If these provisions are adopted, water use
could increase from about 106 to about 108 percent of safe yield.
This meeting is an opportunity for the council to make its own and consider others'
comments on the EIR. Also, staff wanted to inform the council of the additional
alternative, which the Planning Commission is to discuss April 27. No action is needed
at this meeting.
SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
The EIR concludes that the regulations will have no significant impacts, and that the
effects on the community of the expected slowdown in development are due to the water
situation, not the proposed regulations. The EIR says potentially undesirable effects
can be mitigated by conserving and obtaining more water.
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT TAKING ACTION
If some form of development-limiting regulations are not adopted and supplemental water
sources are not made available, water use will probably increase from 106 percent of safe
yield to 113 percent of safe yield (the upper limit of acceptable risk) within three or
four years. In periods of below-average rainfall, the community would face increasingly
disruptive water-saving measures to avoid running out of water.
������►�►►�IIIItiu�� 1`I�III city of San IL-,) OBISPO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Water Regulations
Page 2
Situation
Safe annual yield is the amount of water the city can draw from its reservoirs year after
year and still have sufficient water during a drought like the worst one experienced
since rainfall records have been kept. City water use exceeded safe yield in 1984.
Water use peaked at 13 percent above safe yield in early 1987, and is now about six
percent above safe yield. The closer balance is due to increased yield from "cooperative
use" of the two reservoirs and, apparently, reduced consumption resulting from
conservation programs. No substantial new sources have been developed. The city has not
completed environmental review nor begun engineering design for any supplemental source,
though several sources with time frames of one to seven years are under consideration.
The supplemental source most likely to be available within one year is groundwater. The
city has completed the first phase of a groundwater study, which concluded that as much
as 1,500 acre-feet may be available. Next steps include confirming water rights,
drilling and operating test wells at selected sites, completing environmental review, and
approving construction plans for connecting production wells to the city water system-
Staff
ystemStaff estimates that in the last four years, the annual increase in demand for water due
to additional development has averaged about three percent per year; it will be just
under two percent this year. We expect annual increases of two to three percent during
the next several years if the city sets no limits.
Last year the City Council adopted the Water Management Element of the general plan.
This element outlines the city's efforts to obtain additional water supplies and to use
water more efficiently. It also sets acceptable levels of risk in exceeding the safe
yield of water supplies. The element calls for specific regulations to eventually bring
water use and supply back into balance, by controlling increases in water demand from new
development. The regulations were to have been in effect July 1987.
The Planning Commission and staff have previously recommended draft regulations. As
directed by the council a focused EIR has been prepared and circulated for public review.
Planning, public works, and administration staff have reviewed the water situation,
supplemental sources likely to become available during 1988-89, and the likely
consequences of carrying out existing policy and the proposed regulations: a moratorium
which would probably last less than one year. We have decided to recommend a change in
strategy, while keeping within the goal of working toward a closer balance between safe
yield and use, since the disruption caused by a probably short moratorium does not appear
justified by the resulting small improvement in supply/demand balance.
Environmental Impact Renort
The draft EIR looks primarily at how the proposed regulations would influence the amount
and distribution of development in the county as a whole. The draft EIR, distributed
previously, concludes that the proposed regulations will have no significant impacts. It
says the impacts which would occur follow from the water situation, not from the
mechanisms for allocating available water. It points to more aggressive conservation
programs and obtaining additional water sources as mitigation measures.
������►�►►IlVlllllii�l����►9�U�II City Of san LUIS OBISPO
WiS COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Water Allocation Regulations
Page 3
Staff and the environmental consultants will prepare for the next council consideration
of this item a list of comments received and responses. Staff expects to correct several
technical items in the draft EIR and to further emphasize the factors which could make
the identified results less assured (such as additional employment potential in existing
facilities vsAimited residential expansion, which would lead to a larger imbalance
between jobs and housing than anticipated in the report).
Draft Resulations
In summary, the previously recommended regulations would work this way:
Each May, the council would consider a report from staff on the water situation.
Depending on the relationships between water use and supplies, there would be no limit
for water purposes, or the limit for increased water use in the following year (July
through June) would a be a certain number of acre feet ranging between zero and two
percent of then-current water use, as provided in the Water and Wastewater Management
Element (Figure 7).
It appears that very little or no water would be available to new development in 1988-89
under the proposed regulations and the general plan policies, since nearly all the
additional supply obtained since 1986 ("cooperative use" of the existing reservoirs)
which was not used to bring use and safe yield closer together will have been taken by
projects receiving building permits from July 1987 through June 1988.
Before getting a building permit for a new building, major addition, or change in
building use to one requiring more water, a water allocation would have to be assigned.
Projects would be eligible for water allocations after all discretionary (planning)
approvals had been granted and a complete building-permit application was received. The
city would issue building permits for projects first-come, first-served, so long as their
cumulative expected water use would not exceed the allowed increase.
Several types of minor projects (such as house additions), projects supplying all their
own water, and projects making reductions in water use elsewhere in the city to offset
their expected water use, would be exempt from the limits.
Of the total allowed annual increase, 66 percent would be reserved for residential
projects. Of the water available for residential uses, 15 percent would be reserved for
projects with dwellings affordable to low-income or moderate-income people, as defined by
the city's Affordable Housing Incentives.
The city would assign water allocations (the amount of water a project is expected to
use, in acre-feet per year) and issue building permits in the order complete
building-permit applications are received, until 85 percent of the residential water
reserve had been allocated. If assigned water allocations reached 85 percent of the
residential reserve before the end of the year, the remaining 15 percent of the
residential reserve would be held for any affordable housing projects that might be ready
before the end of the year. If at the end of the year affordable housing projects had
not used all their reserve, the remaining part would be available for any other
residential projects that were waiting.
111111IIIIIiiII11011111 city of San LL.., ogIspo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Water Allocation Regulations
Page 4
While the Water Allocation Regulations are in effect, the Residential Growth Management
Regulations would be suspended.
Of the total allowed annual increase, thirty-four percent would be reserved for
nonresidential projects. For nonresidential projects, water allocations would be
assigned in the order complete building-permit applications are received.
Additional Alternative
The draft EIR identifies the alternatives of allowing a higher risk (letting use reach
115 percent of safe yield) or taking no action. Since water use has been brought below
110 percent of safe yield and there is a good chance, but not a certainty, that some
additional supply will be obtained in 1988-89, staff is suggesting an additional
alternative, which would simplify the adopted evaluation procedure (Figure 7 of the Water
and Wastewater Management Element) and provide additional flexibility, particularly for
the coming year. Following are the basic features of this alternative approach:
A. Beginning on the effective date of the regulations, probably Mid-July, the allowed
increase in water use due to new development would be 87 acre-feet per year (AFY)
--one percent of existing use.
Of this amount, 49 AFY would be available for residential projects in the order of
building-permit applications. Nine AFY would be reserved for housing projects
containing at least 25% of units affordable to low- or moderate-income residents.
Twenty-nine AFY would be available for nonresidential uses.
B. Once these increments of water use are allocated to developments, if no additional
supplies are obtained, no new development which would increase water use would be
allowed, with the exception explained in item C below. At any time after the
effective date, if then-current use exceeded then-current safe yield, any additional
supply obtained would be split, with one-half going to bring use and safe yield
closer and one-half becoming available for allocation to new development. Of the
added yield available to new development, 66 percent would be reserved for
residential projects (15 percent of that for affordable projects) and 34 percent
would be reserved for nonresidential projects.
C. In addition to any added supply available to new development as described in item B,
there would be available 120 AFY for allocation to projects in the Edna-Islay
Specific Plan area and tenant improvements and use changes in completed buildings.
The 120 AFY would be a special, one-time allowance. Once it is used, these types of
projects would be subject to whatever limits are in effect for the rest of the city.
D. If safe yield exceeded use, the whole amount of the difference would be available for
allocation to development.
E. A source would be counted toward total supply only when all of these have occurred:
(1) Environmental review has been completed;
(2) The City Council has approved plans and specifications;
(3) The utilities manager determines that the source could actually deliver the
yield to be counted within one year.
111111i1►►1IIIIIfI1211 �Il city of San LUIS OBISpo
MMMMMMCOUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Water Allocation Regulations
Page 5
F. As with the previously proposed regulations, the determination of city water use
could employ an updated baseline estimate to avoid extreme short-term changes in
measured water use due to weather or economic conditions.
These are the reasons for this approach:
As noted above, most types of new development would have to stop this July, under
existing policies. The existing policies say new sources can be counted toward total
supply only if they are actually providing water when the evaluation is conducted (May of
each year). This limitation was to avoid the temptation to count sources that were
"almost" available, but not certain. The proposed alternative approach would allow
immediate accounting for supply changes.
Also, the revised criteria for considering a source available would avoid a short
moratorium in the event that the city had approved a definite project, and delivery of
water had not begun, but delivery could occur within a year. (These criteria would
allow, for example, the reliable yield from an approved well to be counted toward supply
once the specific well was approved, but would not count the potential for ground water
in general or the safe yield from a new reservoir that would take several years to
fill.) These changes represent a relaxing of the criterion in the footnote to Figure 7
and a tightening of the criteria in the middle column of Figure 7.
The approach of splitting supply additions between new development and reduction of the
disparity between use and supply simply carries out the existing policy to be applied
when use is between 100 and 110 percent of safe yield.
The one-percent increase for the coming year would allow those projects that are close to
receiving building permits to proceed, without substantially enlarging the disparity
between use and safe yield.
The special allocation for Edna-Islay is staff's response to previous Planning Commission
and City Council direction to provide for "pipeline" projects --parts of phased
developments which have made substantial commitments to public facilities in anticipation
of private construction. The separate allocation seems to be the only way to provide for
"pipeline" projects without depriving other projects of a chance to obtain limited
allocations. The allowance for tenant improvements and use changes in existing
buildings, expected to require a small part of the total allowed increase, appears to be
a fair way to provide for them.
The following page shows, in terms of water use, the worst-case consequences of the
alternative approach.
�����n► Il�lllllilll1i°��uq���U city of San ti.� OBISpo
2 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Water Allocation Regulations
Page 6
General residential allocation: 49 AFY (Equivalent to 132 houses on standard
lots)
Low/moderate affordable resid: 9 AFY (Equivalent to 41 apartments)
General, nonresidential: 29 AFY (Equivalent to 181 motel rooms or
350,000 sq. ft. of nonmedical office or
181,000 sq. ft. of service-commercial
building)
Edna-Islay and tenant improve-
ments in existing buildings: 120 AFY (Equivalent to 324 houses on standard
lots; about 450 dwellings remain to be
built in Edna-Islay.)
TOTAL 207 AFY
8.658 AFY (1987-88 use) ± 2(�7 AFY (maximum allowed use without additional su lies
8,180 AFY (1988 safe annual yield)
= 108.4 %
PREVIOUS REVIEW
Staff discussed this alternative approach with the Planning Commission on April 27, and
will report the commissions' comments orally.
When the council last considered the draft regulations, several details remained to be
resolved. Staff outlined options and noted the following apparent preferences of the
council.
1. Government projects: Most are not required to get city building permits and some can
condemn city utility service. The Planning Commission had wanted to require
allocations for government projects. Staff and the council favored accounting for
the expected water use of such projects, but not trying to restrict them through the
regulations.
2. Size limit Staff, the comission, and council agreed that there should be a limit to
the portion of remaining water that could be allocated to one project. Staff
suggested 25 percent of the year's allowed increase for the project's land-use
category, unless the council approved an exception. Making a fair and useful
definition of "a project" is difficult, but staff believes "the smallest, single
discretionary approval by the city (subdivision, use permit, or architectural
approval)" meets the council's intent. (This aspect would need to be refined further
under staff's newly proposed continous rather than annual accounting for use and
supply.)
3. "Pipeline" projects: The commission and council favored special provision for
projects that are part of large, phased developments which have made subtantial
financial commitments to public facilities.
city of San LUIS OBISpo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Water Allocation Regulations
Page 7
4. Evaluation of projects: Staff and the Planning Commission favored the administrative
simplicity of a largely first-come, first-serve allocations within categories
reserved for housing in general, affordable housing, and nonresidential projects.
Some councilmembers favored giving less weight to when a project is proposed and more
weight to its characteristics, along the lines of the current Residential Growth
Management Regulations. (Staff continues to prefer the economy and simplicity of
first-come, first-served within categories that reflect city objectives; we suggest
creating additional reserve categories within the maximum allowed citywide increase
to accommodate certain types of development the council sees as being more desirable,
rather than batching and scoring projects.) Several councilmembers supported some
consideration for housing projects that provided modest dwellings even though they
were not affordable to low- or moderate-income people under the city's Affordable
Housing Incentives criteria. Also, a previously considered option was a reserve
within the nonresidential allocation for downtown projects.
OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
The basic features of the Water and Wastewater Management element, previously drafted
regulations, and proposed changes resulted from cooperative efforts of planning, public
works, and administrative staff. The city attorney will again review draft regulations
and amendments before council action.
ALTERNATIVES
This meeting is mainly to update the council on the water situation, familiarize new
councilmembers with the background for this item, and discuss the option staff is
suggesting. The council need not act on any of the proposals, but should give direction
so staff can return soon with material for action.
RECOMMENDATION
1. Concerning the EIR, take public testimony and consider the written comments which
have been received. Identify council concerns on adequacy and accuracy of the EIR,
so staff and consultants can return with a package that will allow certification of
the final EIR.
2. Concerning the regulations, consider the suggestions of staff, the Planning
Commission, and the public. Initiate any amendments to the Water and Wastewater
management Element which may be needed and give direction so staff can return with
draft regulations for passage to print (probably June 6).
Attached: Comments on EIR received in time for inclusion in packet
Distributed previously: Draft EIR
gm4/ccregrep
4-22-88
9
l
FY.L -ETILAY
FA
�, AGENDA
DAi _ ITEM #
S �
Council to Vote
on
Limitations
toEaseBurden
on L.A. Sewers I Cap C1 of rtants
But this is different in that it is self-im-
posed by city officials, and it carries an
By KEVIN RODERICK.
implicit admission,both by Bradley and the
Times Stat( Writer i City Council. that they goofed. They were
painful public acknowl
forced to make a pa
Sometime today, after six months of had i noted the sewer
stewing and talking, Los Angeles could edgement that they g
abruptly shed its reputation for runaway
system while approving new developments
growth and turn into one of the most all across the city.
restrictive large cities for developers in There is room for the Hyperion treat-
California. meat plant and two sister plants to safely
The new slow-growth look would not be I process a gut 480 million gallons a day of
due to any rising clamor over traffic or raw sewage. The solid p
smog, but to the sewage crisis caused by sewage is pulled out and, in the form of
squeezing more than 3.1 million people thick black sludge. loaded into trucks and
onto an infrastructure built for far fewer driven across the freeways to mountain
people. landfills.Most of the sewage is waste water
Last week the city ordered mandatory that is treated and released into Santa
water conservation to relieve the sewers. Monica Bay five miles from Playa del Rei'
and today the City Council is scheduled to beaches.
vote on a plan—first requcstcd by Mavur In order to ensure that the waste water
Please see SEWER.Page 8
Tom Bradley in December—that will
strictly, if temporarily. ration the number
of building permits available in I,os Angel-
es.
Expected to Pass
If the measure passes as expected, the
permits needed to hook into the city sewers
would be allotted each month based on how
much capacity is left in the Hyperion
sewage treatment plant near El Segundo.
The Hyperion plant. the source of one
embarrassing problem after another for
Bradley and other city officials in recent
years. is on lop of everything else running
out of room to process raw sewage.
Despite more than a dozen City Council
amendments, often to exempt favored
projects, the measure to be considered i
today does not veer drastically from what
the mayor wanted.
"The overall basic concept that the f.
mayor passed to the council, with minor
changes. is still intact." Bradley aide John
Stodder said.
There have been more significant
growth controls imposed in recent years.
Zoning of property all over the city has
been rolled back to comply with state law,
a move that has reduced the growth
potential of the city from 10 million
population to 4 million.In 1986 Los Angeles
voters also passed Proposition U.a measure
that clamped new controls on high-rise
---tet rnrl inn nlans.
Part [[/Tuesday, May 3, 1988
�j • will relieve the sewers at all given
SEWER: Building Permits the exemptions, and he also pre-
greed with Bradley aides who pre-
dict that the controls will be need-
Continued from Page 1 listed on keeping that power for ed only for three years.
discharged into the ocean is ade- themselves. a move that is not Sanitation officials said the sew-
quately treated, city sanitation of- surprising given the historic cozy age capacity problem will go away
ficials say they want to keep relationship between council mcm- when the city finishes expansion of
sewage flow in the city to 460 bers and developers. Most council the Tillman Water Reclamation
million gallons a day on average. members rely on the building in- Plant in Van Nuys. Completion is
But the average daily flow is now dustry for a major share of their now scheduled for mid-1991. But
over 440 million gallons and rising campaign contributions, and they Yaroslaysky said the engineers
by 10 million gallons a year, which now will have the power to decide predicting a 1991 completion are
who gets priority in the issuance of p
would cause capacity to be reached 13 p y the same ones who have been late
in 1990 permits. on other sewage projects.
Bradley's plan tries to check the "We have our concerns, but we -Everything the Public Works
rising flow by slowing the pace of plan to watch them very closely," Department is doing is behind
now construction in the city and,in said Cliff Gladstein,an aide to state schedule and above budget," Ya-
a measure approved by the City Assemblyman Tom Hayden (D- roslaysky said."I think you have to
Council and signed by Bradley last Santa Monica), who joined Aradley look at the history of our ability to
week, by requiring all property in announcing the plan in Decem- get things done on time."
owners and residents to install ber."We're still on board."
water-saving devices. The council has also voted to
Construction would be allowed exempt several large development
to add only 5 million gallons to the projects from the rationing process,
average daily sewage flow in a including high-rise downtown of-
single year. Officials expect anoth- fice towers sought by the city
er 1 million gallons a day of new Community Redevelopment Agen-
ftowteach year from people moving cy and four projects that the Los
into existing houses in Los Angeles, Angeles County Board of Supervi-
and another 1 million gallons to be sors is planning to build.
added by new sewage from nearby Other amendments give priority
cities that use the Los Angeles in the issuance of building permits
sewers. to developers who agree to include
For the Los Angeles portion,city low-income housing in their proj-
officials would attempt to keep tabs ects. Developers who avoid adding
by calculating the sewage that any to the sewage flow by retrofitting
given building project is expected existing buildings in Los Angeles
to create, then cut off new permits are exempt altogether. Bradley
when the 5-million-gallon limit is aides said. Builders of a single
reached. house.as opposed to a tract or some
Bradley originally tried to give commercial building, also receive
the power to ration permits to the priority.
Board of Public Works, a paid City Councilman %cv Yaroslav-
citizens commission that he ap- sky added a provision that ensures
points. The board oversees the that 65% of the remaining sewage
bureaus of Sanitation and Engi- capacity will be used for housing,
neering and would be in a position and only 35% for commercial de-
to closely monitor the sewage flow. velopments. But Yaroslaysky said
However, the City Council in- he is skeptical that the measure
a " L Tm aqt c y c y E a; Q ; °r� F0.
.--. •o m C 7 E as m L L .�. >> O C ' x
U m Cl C O CA O > y C L m y .+ hy pm-
cc > Cc
*'� aMmCli doEmmC' 3 ca: S -- �2� E� c
ca� L° EtNec3o°Ji _ o > EO. -. � ca` Q'a E � Z
n
> mg
[L] .� a d N N d E W °v — C m m CCn
aN. a
Et m° c 3 y� ctc,3 a :° S o m u
-
oC.mEcb " v mmo = yy .� cw d _ W
L �.00 00*0
�Ad—>"A � E cum —
wE°cc
V CO
m � °am ��o mxenia�« � � sci =
00 0 CJ
m C =Q >f V N > N" m V m
.:, ... O p 'C c ° E o y aT—° 6 E .m t aau y E m
o ='C � 7 m o a F 7 C m C7
U3m.`GFuiEa 7oirm. 3ycu6Oim
oN° oc ° 8 � ac°, '3Ca
� ? c yd � `ot a
LL bo nN `' N y cpm V0`0 >•, �>' E
L E E u � .T v o c S y m o °-
u u ` c o ° 3
N <0 'm V C y V m '� m PCm C G L m C
E..1IV
C C Qf m m W 'N N y 'E c 41 m = V
> vm« 0 E >;d ucm u.03 ° c ..
m a d o mm p c m E H m
O a> C L O c ad E ° y > � m c q �g
� '� Q r 4) > 7 N y V 'W p 'm' O.L m T•V
O •° m N 2 c C y N L N m N
c CJ
oc � mL ; A ^ E+ O ';Smm -• ce3yR�
r m c 5 -• a cc W N u y o >+ u 3 '60
" ' > N« 3 � a0 v9«mC c �iQo� o
° '—ate ' d c ° � > an Cu «°'$' an Cu >r e
L 7 L a c t m y1•p .
Tr�� :; yYo7E� T¢1Lo• Om ° 6`1 - c .m. aEia, V V N
to 0
cc
moto W9 C3Lc � . � �LC1`� moo
u =
3 MIC
myAEE o� � U ° dO - �' � m < =uv
3 � a v = o
V y
E ' cm mUEcc
-, y oEPa
UEN � � 3 .. mcmov yL c cim
$•cmc « N a « W L �... .:. a1
t� >,a ar m..
°,« N c = m Sym m 3s 7C 'O
m m 3 m m s 3 > c o F c L m�7 0 •—
3E .Oo o (uE E ` r aNc3o � � E °
O a o r a„; Fo 'C ac
W .o > N N to w m 3F ' o m.`
T � wmr- yQ � °� 3c ��y �< � o > °�'� 0Y
w
F o N Q e 3 3 � E-F�"L 'V a2 Z 3 a=
«yy c V
7 0 6f V m U.Q C U
m 0. ° m E 3 m� >'m o c'a c we L
Q Smp ai ` � m � 0 -6oma i Etu a - m
m y m` E m u m
O m t m 00 5.mr c >k C L r G O m 0 a
'Cr maY Y?' mN ; mm a1Vmm« m Om O
. xm o � >m �wm Eoc� uoc
c c m E c Ena ° c>a n a $m
m r'o ° c mO r m «
m m3 cmn v°o NpE a Emu'� cm � m c
=.—
it
° L r ~ t m m v T r p m m E o g 0 C
L.' — 9m cn mL io. a m v
�' 3 Sn mZm E'u o -D > 2 �$��nt € m � m�
C 'mm nummo . ooa o
y 8c �.
o
ENm � ymca ' cL
coo > m mom r ' c m3Y
go
i; CO
EE a, 9. mm Em
C.L Mg
. mEm'5lb�
moEEmmS0 ` a .
pyyp _ p
v C C7. cc a v � u- m > m o �co5 mai
CO
-Cos 10 m
m T mm� yi lL QO U mJ m r
p _ m
^ ■ ■ ■ m m z« m ■ O■ >?■C■ ;■ m
?rsaq/ tL? iA'• f v f ° a F m ?
IIoB Angola Mmes
WATER: Sewer System,
Drought Spur City Action
Continued from Page 1 Owners of single-family homes
day that the action was also neces- will not need to prove they have
sary to avert a lawsuit or other installed the devices until they sell
action by the EPA and environ- the property or apply to the city for
mental groups that might shut a building permit to remodel or
down all growth in the city because expand.
of the inadequate sewer system. The drought-inspired law works
"This is a bitter pill to swallow, somewhat differently. That law
but woe have to do it,"said Council- will require all residents and busi-
man Hal Bernson, chairman of the nesses to immediately change their
council Planning Committee. habits of water use. After two
The measure seeks to protect the written warnings, violators would
sewer system by reducing the flow face having a valve that restricts
of liquid waste, which accounts for flow to just above a trickle installed
90% of the flow in any urban on their water line by the DWP.
sewer. Los Angeles currently Although of less application to
pumps more than 900 million gal- residents,the most sweeping action
lons a day of partially treated requested by Bradley to protect the
sewage effluent—essentially, sewers is a temporary delay in the
mildly contaminated water—into issuance of building permits by the
Santa Monica Bay from its 35- city.If the law were in force today,
year-old Hyperion treatment plant it would force a 30% reduction in
near Playa del Rey. the pace of current development in
City sanitation officials say the Los Angeles,city officials said.
effluent pumped into the sea is After tacking on more than a
cleaner now than at any time in dozen amendments to Bradley's
recent years. But the record level proposal last week,the City Coun-
of raw sewage flowing into Hyperi- cil on Tuesday exempted four major
on could force plant operators to let projects sponsored by Los Angeles
the sewage flowthrough to the bay County. The entire measure was
without adequate treatment. That sent to the city Planning Commis.
in turn could lead to fines and other sion for a hearing this Thursday.
action against the city by the Gage said the Bradley Adminis-
federal Environmental Protection tration is confident that the mea-
Agency and state regulators. sure will come back to the City
Under the water-saving ordi. Council next week for final ap-
nance approved Tuesday, owners proval.
of commercial property—including As now written, the measure
apartments—will be required to would allow the city to issue build-
have the installation of low-flow Ing permits that cause up to 5
shower heads and toilet-tank dis- million gallons a day of new sewage
placement devices inspected and flow to be added in Los Angeles
confirmed by Oct. 13.Violators will each year. An amendment by
face a 10% surcharge on their Councilman Zev Yaroslaysky re-
water bills that would escalate with served 65% of that allotment for
repeat violations. home builders and other projects
that add housing.
Process In the works City Engineer Robert Horii esti-
The checks may be performed by 'mates that another.1 million gal-
plumbers,home inspectors or other tons a day of flow will be added
workers certified for that purpose each year in growth within the
by the city Department of Building cities, such as Beverly Hills and
and Safety. The department must Santa Monica, that use the Los
first set up the certification pro- Angeles sewer system.Those cities
cess, which could take several will also be ordered to cut back
weeks,officials said. growth.Another 1 million gallons a.
Free shower heads and toilet- day of added flow has been set
tank devices will be distributed to aside to accommodate population
all households in the city—again growth in Los Angeles that occurs
including apartments—by the De- because of migration, not new
partment of Water and Power. development.
Although residents will not be The 7 million gallons a day in
charged, the devices will cost the new flow is all that can be accom-
DWP an estimated $9 million and modated,Horii said,until expansion
officials said they will have to seek is complete at a Van Nuys sewage,
a rate increase to cover the cost and treatment plant in mid-1991. The
also recoup the revenue lost since controls can be lifted once the plant
most people will use—and buy— is completed,or sooner if the water
less water than normal. conservation measures succeed.