Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 02011994 - WC.2 WC 2 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra FROM: WATER COMMITTEE , Costa Supervisor Sunne Wright McPeak , amu ,/ Supervisor Tom Torlakson DATE: February 1, 1994 SUBJECT: East County Water Planning Issues SPECIFIC. REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS Direct the Community Development Department to arrange a meeting to discuss future water planning and supply issues with the County Board of Supervisors and appropriate agencies and organizations within the east County area. REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION/BACKGROUND The Water Committee has recommended a meeting of the Board, east County water districts, cities and other organizations to discuss current problems and future water supply opportunities for the east County area. The east county area has a myriad of issues needing to be addressed, ranging from the use of groundwater, related contamination issues, conservation and reclamation programs, growth and the potential for future surface water supply. The County has recommended a Master Plan for water for East County, and the Contra Costa Water District has recently completed a supply-demand study for this area. Many questions remain as to how a Master Plan of this type can proceed, and this meeting could provide additional insight for this process. Much of the planned growth for east county is within Contra Costa Water District (CCWD) service area boundaries, necessitating (at some point) conservation, dual systems and further study. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S) : Supervisor Sunne W. McPeak Supervisor Tom Torlakson ACTION OF BOARD ON 1 ,79V APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED _— OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Contact: Roberta Goulart (510) 646-2071 ATTESTED / 9 c cc: Community Development Dept. (CDD) PHIL BATCH OR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BY , DEPUTY RG:rn RWCIlEC-H2O.bod r t StJAU"RY The purpose of the East County Water Supply Management Study (Study) is to identify future water demands and potential water supplies for East Contra Costa County, outline institutional options to match supply with firturt demand,and suggest appropriate interim measures to facilitate development of future water systems.The Study area shown on Figure S-1 includes: the cities of Antioch, Brentwood and Pittsburg; the unincorporated communities of Bethel Island, Byron, Discovery Bay,Oakley and Bay Point;and,the rural East County. The planning horizon extends to approximately 2050. The Study has been divided into two phase.-,s. Phase I, presented in this report, provides a preliminary analysis of future demand,water supplies,existing infrastructure, and general issues related to cooperative water resource management. This information provides a basis to evaluate and select future water service options for further study. Phase II will consist of a detailed analysis of selected water service alternatives, including new infrastructure requirements, cost estimates, implementation requirements, and institutional issues. The scope of Phase II will be more fully defined after planning and water agencies have had an opportunity to review the Phase I findings. Water Demand Estimates The planning horizon for the study extends to the year 2050 to reflect the lead times required for water management planning. Because none of the local general plans extends beyond the year 2010, it is necessary to speculate about development beyond that forecast in these general plans. Four fixture development scenarios were generated for the Study to construct a planning envelope for possible future water demands. One scenario depicts no development beyond General Plan Buildout. Three other scenarios were developed which reflect increases in water demand of approximately 10,20 and 25 percent above that estimated for General Plan Buildout. Since current plans are the only approved pians,there may be no further growth beyond General Plan Buildout. If there is to be no fiuther growth beyond current plans,the General Plan Buildout scenario is sufficient. On the other hand,over time there may be new General Plans and additional growth. If there is further growth in the future,other scenarios are needed to estimate the possible significance with respect to future water demands. The three scenarios defined for this Study reflect increased density and development in logical increments, - 1 - As shown on Table S-1,demand estimates for the scenarios range from 121,000 af/yr for General Plan Buildout to 153,000 af/yr for the Combination scenario. TABLE S-1 STUDY AREA DEMANDS (AF/YR) (a) r PLAN DENSIFICATION SUBURBANIZATION COMBINATION T(b) SCENARIO(c) SCENARIO(d) SCENARIO(e) 10 Percent 20 Percent 25 Percent Increase Increase Increase 131,000 146,000 153,000 ) (117 MGD) (130 MGD) (137 MGD) ax.Da 218 MGD Max.Da 42 MGD Max.Da 255 MGD Max.Da NOTES: (a) Demands are presented for an average year. (b) This demand arises from the Buildout of existing General Plans. All allowable development occurs,but no additional development takes place within the study area. (c) This demand corresponds to development at a higher density than current General Plans within the Urban Limit Line. (d) This demand corresponds to suburbanization of additional physically developable areas in East County. (e) This demand is a combination of the other demand scenarios and represents an upper limit to demand estimates over the time period of the Study. The General Plan Buildout demand estimate is based on projections by individual jurisdictions within the study area. This estimate agrees well with the CCWD estimate for the entire study area using a method based on water duties,i.e.the amount of water typically used per acre of a particular land use,and the County General Plan land use map. Demands generated for future scenarios were calculated by applying the appropriate water duty to the postulated land uses in each scenario. These demands represent average water use in normal weather years. The effect of on-going conservation programs is included. Water Sup& Potential sources of water available to meet municipal and industrial (M&I) water needs in the study area include: 1) Delta sources through existing entitlements held by Contra Costa Water District, East Contra Costa Irrigation District, and Byron-Bethany Irrigation District; 2) -2- groundwater,and,3)reclaimed water. Rights to divert water from the San Joaquin River are held by CCWD,Antioch,and several industries in the study area. Because of variable water quality due to chlorides, the supplies have limited potential to supply long-term needs. The information presented corresponds to estimates of supply available in normal years,unaffected by drought or other uncertainties. An analysis of long-term quantity and quality as well as the legal and institutional requirements for use as municipal and industrial (M&I) water in the study area,was conducted for each potential supply. If all requirements are met,the estimated average supply available for M&I uses is 133,100 to 138,100 af/yr, as illustrated in Table S-2. Additionally, approximately 24,100 of/yr may be available for non-potable uses such as industrial process water and urban landscaping. Potential sources determined to have limited potential for supplying water to the study area include new Delta appropriations,riparian rights and East Bay Municipal Utility District's Mokelumne River water. The RelationshiR Between Supply Treatment Capacity and Demand Based on the demand and supply information developed in the report, average year demands for both the General Plan Buildout and the Densification scenarios can be met if all the identified potable water supplies are available. If non-potable supplies are developed to their fullest extent, it may be possible to meet average year demands under all the scenarios. Additional treatment capacity would need to be developed in the study area to meet maximum day buildout demands for treated water. Because individual municipal water agencies or special districts currently control water supply development,identified supplies and facility capacities are not necessarily available on a regional basis. Regional,sub-regional and individual agency resource management concepts have been identified in the Study for further evaluation. The conclusions of this study must be tempered by the realization that the allocation of water in California and the status of existing water rights are currently being re-examined in light of the Federal Central Valley Project Improvement Act and regulations imposed by Federal agencies under both the Endangered Species Act and the Clean Water Act In addition,the uncertainty of supply,as evidenced by the recent prolonged drought, is a caveat on these conclusions. Greater confidence in the availability of adequate supply can be gained through water banking,conservation and reclamation programs. For present purposes,known supply quantities as shown in Table S-2 are used. A more detailed discussion of supply and distribution issues is reserved for Phase 11 of this Study. -3- C ? � u E C U v 40 o. On « G a So QQ QQ QQ G G u r E G O a Fic epo iY�'� C U � N _ � f�ri "" � � �0 6�'� V al •e�0 � '_C 0�0 C !!� � 3 � r � E u � a3 � •� N O M Vi ee w m !e at � W 'C _ d V U co Ac 4r. -4— As a result of the analysis performed for the Study, a number of interim planning and resource management activities were identified which would facilitate the timely development of new water systems in the study area. • Establish cooperative inter-agency planning processes related to water supply • Develop study area-wide water facility seismic and reliability criteria • Conduct a definitive analysis of groundwater resources • Develop a groundwater management program • Consider the use of contracts for wholesale water service to define future water.supply availability and purchase obligations • Collaborate on implementing the State MOU and County goals regarding conservation and water reclamation • Share the results of ongoing independent studies of long-term water supply issues • Complete Phase 11 of the Study addressing infrastructure, costs, and implementation requirements • Resolve water right issues related to transfer of water from agricultural to municipal and industrial use The timing, priority and schedule associated with undertaking these activities has yet to be established. -5- i CC• 'llrr f E`t'4' .F •gunty er HDD t" o► Come., emPty r�t1'� l ,rr.� 4; :� .w..o' -,• . � 1. PlItabWe 1 � ;e.y. •r in Llghts, w Antioch- M, lntiuefi..` '8y VENis CUFF .x. ,k f ,t + iV win ! mater officials et+e uneasy aboutiST COUNTY the adequacy of long-terra water ty yes f �gEast Coun- SUPPLIES , Z the first forecast of the area's water for the amct hell F:: ,tetra Costa Water Distrkt: ='i century. _e=asyZorrtra Costa Irrigation.DistricE The area from to Paint to Hy Pon n-Bethany irri appears to have enough water � .�° gation District for wet and normal times, but itExpressed in erre-bet per year' might have little to spare,concludes East County Nonpotable the study by the Contra Costa Water Satpplier Water rights ...drinking use use District. ::::;:::;::;:; :;>::,;:;::..:,::..:>::;: it's unclear if thane would .be enough water during droughts by ECCID 50,000 21,000 7,250 ..the year 2050, planners say. :>:,,.:::,<.;:;;:;.;:>::>:?»>::;�: -->::;..•.;;: "'I think this is a wake-up call ..... ......�..................... ....:...:....::<....:,.:.:::.::.,:.::::::: that:ave can no karager fail tA&an Ground water 5,000.10,000 �.2F+:i:w:i:�:::_i`:::?`:Xi': :X:�?:;:.::j:.;V;:c}.:.}Wyy'•�Ci..::;YiF}isi::i't,Y,.;::i.::':.i::::'::;}:::.:::.:::i:.:...:,:;.:.,.:, . Bre old belief there will be plenWW »:;:«<::::>;>::<.,:<: ,:..::.::;::::::::<._ ,.;: 68 ::::::> supplies around," said Don Freitas, TOTAL 285,000 138,100 2a,10o a CCWD board member from Anti TOTAL "We have enough to get by "a►acre-foot supplies enough water for one to two families fora year. now, but it's not so dear in the fu- ~Does not apply 44re, especiallyIn droughts. We T*ws need to plan on how to deal with The water board is scheduled to discuss the stud,► it 7:30 tonight at ICI-*ink this is a wake-up call that we can no its Concord headquarters. The boas it 6 longer fall back on the old belief there will be p.m. County supervisors asked for the plendfid awIIPS aTiDL+Ind J9study becauseof fears that water . supplies might not keep up with growth W.eastern Contra Costa,the —=Don Freltes,CCWD board member .tasting growing area of the county. The population in East County is pressed a willingness to sell irriga- expected to grow from 167,186 to M MEETIM tion water for use in homes as the 330,500 between 1990 and 2010,re- Who:Contra Costa Water District area converts from farms to subdi- gional planners say. Board visions. ..Potential supplies amount to be- When: 7,30 p.m.tonight County supervisors have suggest- tween 430,800 acre-feet of water When: 1331 Concord Ave., Concord. ed that all the interested agencies and. 135,600 acre-feet in normal What 01samsm of East County oversee a more detailed study to de- years,the study estimates. Water supply Judy. velop a master plan for the area That might xat -be enough, de- pending on how fast the area grows. -- -- -:.East County water-demand who worked on the Addy were un- I,I would climb to 121,000 ecrwfeet, svailable for comment Tuesday. under the growth allowed for in County officials had wanted county aiad municipal general plans earns .sdutions proposad,..bui .the .for the-are--VAder a woratkasoe witer'district decided ft wins prema= scdo an enario, however, demand could . 'tura.:r`It doesir't """I' 8 for us climb to MAW act feet a.year if;",to.1propose,gm when growth is fasti4tion ed ` Ong isn't.inalolvecl,'. said tracts. Water suppliers for' a area irpokesman Ai'Donner, who could,accommodate tire-maxim...,..;.the study a Am.step,toward possible papulation in-normal years a water future.for East Coun�, gtdtiing asiotiaer 2 .} 4 t Contra Costa Water is the big. retef,. &pst cf the patdhkptvYBler farm wiisder"tG a �� that'• W40 the Area. and lama outsbor ung, eC- The district supplies untreated wig in� • ..:,; ... ,.., al4der. �ity.Point, , Anti- �Wr d* der didn't at• ocb et>a> .Hr+eatwood� tempt 14 00 ► IA*zip,we- Hay and lendowiaers in marry ru• liniesmaks dict the- +erity cd in areas outside CCWD boundaries P Z Mn t et aa.ground Water. tempt propose Cgntra.Costa — .is Abopping around o two kyr Brentwood and •fcfr mother xaKure because if ex- Wates, rind drstruai would jointly pects it's groundwater supplies what wlan ho vioulo .ode. �r to won't be enough to keep up wii�l b ith o A mare der MW study is needed East Contra Costa and Byron- to answer those questions, CCWD Bethany irrigation districts have ex. �►mies`° fT . offrcdaissay. Water dictriet *A..,:"s.+.r,*_-- r---