SR-05-14-2013-4ACity Council Meeting: May 14, 2013
Agenda Item: 4— i
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Martin Pastucha, Director of Public Works
Subject: Sustainable Water Master Plan Status Update
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Direct staff to proceed with the Sustainable Water Master Plan (SWMP) and fully
develop Option 1 — Staff Recommendation.
2. Review and comment on SBx7 -7 water use goal of 123 gallons per capita per
day (GPCD) and direct staff to change the next Urban Water Management Plan
(UWMP) SBx7 -7 water use goal from 123 GPCD to 141 GPCD at the UWMP
2015 update.
3. Direct staff to proceed with the water and wastewater rate study.
Executive Summary
The development of a Sustainable Water Master Plan (SWMP) entails a multi- faceted
approach to address the City's goal of achieving water self- sufficiency by the year
2020. With the City's current capability to meet approximately 70% of its water demand
from local groundwater sources, the objective is to develop strategies to close the "gap"
represented by the current purchase of imported water. Through a combination of
demand management approaches and water supply augmentation tactics, subjected to
a life cycle cost assessment, various portfolios are being developed to represent
permutations and combinations of options that best meet the program objectives and
continue to support the City's Sustainability Plan. This report presents an update of the
SWMP and the process and tools developed, including portfolio development and the
rate study update to allow the Council and the community to evaluate the mix of
strategies to achieve water self- sufficiency by 2020. Additionally, this report
recommends a portfolio of conservation and supply approaches, as well as a
modification to the water consumption goal previously adopted.
Background
In a study session at the March 8, 2011 Council meeting, staff presented the concepts
and principles involved in achieving the goal of water self- sufficiency by the year
2020. Following the study session, staff embarked on the development of a Sustainable
Water Master Plan (SWMP) in order to achieve this goal. In support of this effort an
agreement with Richard C. Slade and Associates, LLC (RCS) to perform a groundwater
assessment was authorized at the August 23 2011 Council meeting, and another
agreement with Kennedy /Jenks Consultants (KJC) was authorized at the March 27,
2012 Council meeting to prepare the Sustainable Water Master Plan.
In an information item to Council dated November 5, 2012, staff presented an update on
the status of the development of a Sustainable Water Master Plan (SWMP) to guide the
City's efforts to achieve the goal of water self- sufficiency by 2020. At that time, the
SWMP was 25 percent complete. The SWMP is now 75 percent complete. This report
presents an update on the status of the work performed since the last report and a
request that Council provide comment and direction in order to complete the SWMP.
This update includes information regarding the following:
• Advisory Committee
• Water demand analysis
• Water conservation program modeling and analysis
• Analysis of additional local groundwater opportunities
• Analysis of the potential for rainwater harvesting and city -wide stormwater
capture
• Recycled water market study
• Preliminary implementation cost analysis
Discussion
At its core, a water master plan targeting water self- sufficiency by 2020 must first
develop an estimate of the demand in that year, and then compare the city's current
supply capabilities against this demand. The resultant "gap" is then filled by a portfolio
of water conservation strategies and new water supply opportunities such that the city's
demand in 2020 can be met without dependence on imported water supplies. The
following sections of this report address the demand estimated for the year 2020, along
with recommended water conservation programs and new supply approaches.
2
Advisory Committee
A volunteer advisory committee was formed near the inception of the project comprising
of individuals interested in assisting the City pursue its goal of water self- sufficiency.
Advisory committee members include Mark Gold, Chair of the City's Environmental
Task Force, Associate Director UCLA Institute of the Environment and Sustainability;
Andy Lipkis, Tree People Founder and President; Conner Everts, Southern California
Watershed Alliance Executive Director; Ed Osann, Natural Resources Defense Council
Senior Policy Analyst, Water Program; Judy Abdo, Santa Monica representative on the
MWD Board of Directors, former Santa Monica Mayor and Councilmember; Caryn
Mandelbaum, Environment Now Freshwater Program Director, Staff Attorney; Tracy
Quinn, Natural Resources Defense Council Policy Analyst, Water Program; Deborah
Weinstein, Tree People Director of Policy. Meetings with available members of the
committee have occurred January 10, February 28, March 11, and April 10 to discuss
approaches and strategies to be included in the SWMP. It is anticipated the advisory
committee will continue to be convened throughout the duration of the project. The
City's Task Force on the Environment was presented an update of the project at its April
15, 2013 meeting.
Water Demand Analysis
To achieve water self- sufficiency by the year 2020, the City must have a clear
understanding of its future water needs, or demands. The total amount of local water
supplies needed to meet the City's sustainability goal includes water supplied to
customers as well as an allowance for system water loss, and water lost through the
treatment process referred to as brine or production loss.
The City's initial estimate of the volume of water needed to meet the sustainability goal
was approximately 3,700 acre -feet (AF); however, that estimate was based on the
assumption that water demand would not increase in the future beyond current levels
and did not consider the effects that economic activity and weather may have on future
water demands. While the extent of these effects may vary based on local conditions,
there is a general increase in demands with increased economic activity and hotter,
M
drier weather conditions. These effects were not incorporated in the demand
projections available in current planning documents, including the 2010 Land Use and
Circulation Element (LUCE). A comparison of current water demands and the LUCE
projected demands suggests that the LUCE projection may be too high. The 2010
LUCE projected water demands of approximately 15,300 AF in 2012; a detailed billing
data analysis shows actual demand in 2012 was approximately 13,500 AF — a
difference of 1,800 AF.
To plan for future supply needs, a comprehensive demand analysis was performed in
order to develop new demand projections that align more closely with current demands
and were adjusted for effects of weather and economic activity applicable to Santa
Monica. First, a new baseline demand projection was developed. This baseline
demand projection begins with current actual demands of approximately 13,500 AF in
2012 and grows at the same rate as the water demand projection found in the LUCE.
LUCE annual growth rates were used since it was developed based on the City's best
estimates of demographic and development projections used in the City's General Plan
and other planning documents. Figure 1 compares the water demand projection found
in the LUCE with the new baseline demand projection.
El
Figure 1. Demand Analysis: Comparison of the LUCE Water Demand Projection with the Baseline
Demand Projection
Water Demand
18000
17000
15,900
16100 15;366
14,100
a 14000 13,500
13101 - --
12000
11000
10000
1OJ2
l0S
c'p8 20 c�0�0
✓`9
Year
—LUCE
Demand Projection
— Baseline Demand Projection
Next, the effects of weather and economic conditions on the City's water demand were
explored. Regression analyses were performed to evaluate the correlation between
water use for various customer categories (single family, multi - family, commercial,
institutional and landscape irrigation) and weather and economic (unemployment rate)
factors. Data from the regression analyses indicated that there was no significant
correlation observed with weather related parameters for the City. However, a better
correlation was found between the City's unemployment rate and the water use of
single family, multi - family and landscape irrigation customer classes. A decrease in the
unemployment rate resulted in an increase in water use among these customers. The
analysis suggests the reduction in water use was due in large part to the recession and
higher unemployment rate.
5
Accordingly, the baseline water demand was adjusted to project future water demands
under good economic conditions, as shown in Figure 2. The "good economy" demand
projection is approximately 10 percent higher than the baseline water demand
projection. Given that the City's existing local water supply capacity is approximately
9,000 AF, the demand analysis suggests that the gap between available water supply
and the volume of water required to meet the City's sustainability goal in 2020 is
actually closer to 6,500 AF, rather than 3,700 AF (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Demand Analysis: Luce Demand Projection, Baseline Demand Projection & Good
Economy Demand Projection
Water Demand
1600D _ _.... __ _- ___- ------- - - - - --
15,300 .,,._
15000
1400(
13000 _ 13,500 _.
LL¢ 12000
11000
10000
9400
15,900
8000
s'Ofc� 10� t'O�V �OJJ` s'OT6` I�Tj �0�8 �0�9 ��20
Year
- - LUCE Demand Projection - - Baseline Demand Projection
"Good Economy" Demand Projection —Existing Local Supply Capacity
A multi- faceted water supply portfolio is required in order for the City to meet its water
self- sufficiency goal. This portfolio should include both demand reduction measures
through the implementation of water conservation programs, as well as new supply and
water treatment options. New water supply options may include additional groundwater
n.
capacity, rainwater harvesting and stormwater capture, and additional recycled water
sources. These supply options are explored in greater detail in the following sections.
Water Conservation Modeling and Analysis
Since the November status report, the water conservation analysis was refined to better
define the City's opportunities to reduce the projected water demands described above
through the implementation of water conservation programs. After completion of a
detailed billing and past conservation program and policy analysis, a comprehensive list
of water conservation programs was developed and modeled using the Alliance for
Water Efficiency's Water Conservation Tracking Tool. This model allows users to
analyze the water savings potential and implementation costs of a collection of water
conservation programs. The model also uses local demographic and housing
characteristics to estimate water savings that could be attributable to enhanced
efficiency requirements in State plumbing codes and water fixture usage standards, and
predict reductions in demand from other applicable programs.
The suite of programs selected for analysis address each of the City's water customer
sectors (single - family, multi - family, commercial, institutional, and landscape) with an
emphasis on water users that shows opportunity for additional conservation. Since
1988 the City has invested millions of dollars in resources to retrofit nearly every indoor
plumbing fixture in commercial, single - family and multi - family buildings with water
saving products. As a result water usage in the City has declined even though the
City's population and development have increased.
Results of the billing analysis indicated that the greatest remaining potential for water
conservation exists among the City's commercial and institutional customers, as well as
in landscape water use. Two specific large water users, St. John's Medical Center, the
Santa Monica - Malibu Unified School District, and laundry facilities, were identified by
City staff as customers with a high potential for additional water savings and programs
were developed to target those potential savings.
7
Implementation levels for each water conservation program modeled were based on
analyses of saturation rate of existing water saving plumbing fixtures and landscapes,
customer surveys, staff knowledge of the City's customers and their willingness to
implement these programs, and products that will have long -term water savings that are
not dependent on significant changes in the customer's behavior. The goal was to
develop a diverse selection of programs that aggressively pursued demand reduction
through retrofitting existing indoor plumbing that is already water - saving with plumbing
fixtures that save about twenty percent more water in addition to retrofitting landscapes
with plants and irrigation that can save up to eighty percent more compared to existing
landscapes.
The resulting suite of conservation programs (Table 1) is projected to save
approximately 775 AFY of water in the year 2020. An additional 420 AFY of savings is
expected in 2020 as a result of State plumbing and building code standards that require
higher water saving fixtures. In addition, a reduction in system -wide leaks and non -
revenue water through capital investment in the system is projected to save another 250
AFY of water for a total demand reduction of approximately 1,443 AFY in 2020.
L-1
Table 1. Water Conservation Programs
Sample Water Conservation Program for the City of Santa Monica -April 2, 2013
Residential HE Clothes Washer Rebate
Single Family
890
30
$24,100
$216,600
Residential HET Rebate
Single Family
3568
77
$14,400
$129,700
Residential WRlC Rebate
Single Family
1920
79
$29,300
$263,800
City's Cash for Grass Rebate Program
Single Family
1,100,000 square feet
51
$209,900
$1,889,100
City's Orlp lrri8atlon Rebate Program
Single Family
1,100,000 square feet
24
$139,900
$1,259,4DO
City's HE Nozzle Rebate Program
Single Family
550,000 square feet
7
$52,500
$472,300
Water Smart Software-5% Reduction in Water Use (NEW)
Single Fancily
3,040customers
8.._.
$26,600
$239,300
0.8gpf Toilets (Direct Installation) (NEW)
Multi Family
5,496
73
$174,800
$1,573,100
Residential HE Clothes Washer Rebate
Mull! Family
544
19
$9,800
$88,600
Residential HET Rebate
Multi Family
4,000
13
$16,200
$145,400
Laminar Flow Restrictors for St. John's Medical Center (NUM)
Commercial
664
6
$1,500
$13,600
Commercial Dry Vacuum Pump Rebate
Commercial
40
3
$1,400
$12,600
Commercial Co rnectionless Food Steamer Rebate
Commercial
2
1
$100
$500
Commercial Zero Water Urinal Rebate
Commercial
4
Ol
$25
$200
Commercial Ultfa•Low Volume Urinal Rebate
Commercial
544
8
$3,500
$31,100
Commercial Conductivity Controller Rebate
Commercial
2
4
$0
$0
Commercial HET Rebate
Commercial
200
5
$2,500
$22,900
CII Cooling Tower Treatment- Zero Olowdown(NEW)
Commercial
2
1
$200
$1,400
Coin-Operated Laundry Machine Retrofit (NEWT
Commercial
45
360
$3,500
$31,800
HETs for St, Johns Medical Center (NEW)
Commercial
10
0.1
$100
$1,100
0.125 gpf Urinals for St. John's Medical Center(NEW}
Commercial
7
0.1
$40
$4GO
1.5 gpm Faucet Aerators for St. John's Medical Center (NEW)
Commercial
158
0.3
$800
$6,900
SMM USD Audit$ &Retrofits - Assumes 5% Reduction in Total
Institutional
Maintained through
5
$94,400
$849,400
H2O Use (NEW)
2020
Figure 3 shows the potential effect of implementing the recommended water
conservation programs on the City's projected water demand assuming the "good
economy' water demand projection previously described. Implementation of the
recommended water conservation programs reduces the volume of additional water the
City must produce to meet its self- sufficiency goals from approximately 6,500 AF to
approximately 5,000 AF. While water conservation alone will not enable the City to meet
its water self- sufficiency goal, it can significantly reduce the volume of additional water
supply required.
Figure 3 - Demand Reduction as a Result of Recommended Water Conservation Program
Water Demand
While conservation programs are often less expensive than physically constructing and
operating new water supply or treatment facilities, the noted reductions in projected
water demand are not without a cost. For the City of Santa Monica, these costs include
the cost of the actual conservation program, increased staff and public outreach costs
associated with new program implementation and management, and the associated
loss in water sales revenues (this latter component is partially offset by reduced water
supply production costs). Based on the City's current demands and water revenues, it
is estimated that the effective annual cost for the recommended water conservation
program reflected in Table 1 is approximately $7.2 million through 2020.
fin?
16,000
15,490AF
14,000 ro -..'".
— „. ....> .> — --- - _. _. _
14,045 AF
12,000
m
10.000
d
LL
9,000 AF
rojected additional supply needed
6,000 — -- -
-- -- - - --
111s,000 or 2020 demand Is approximately
-
AF.
4,000
2,000
?0fS 209
7o -10 1�0f1 ,20,8
`�% 700
Year
—Projected Demand
Demand After Conservation —Existing Local
Supply Capacity
While conservation programs are often less expensive than physically constructing and
operating new water supply or treatment facilities, the noted reductions in projected
water demand are not without a cost. For the City of Santa Monica, these costs include
the cost of the actual conservation program, increased staff and public outreach costs
associated with new program implementation and management, and the associated
loss in water sales revenues (this latter component is partially offset by reduced water
supply production costs). Based on the City's current demands and water revenues, it
is estimated that the effective annual cost for the recommended water conservation
program reflected in Table 1 is approximately $7.2 million through 2020.
fin?
Additional Local Groundwater Opportunities
In addition to implementing the water conservation programs described above, the City
will also need to expand local groundwater resources. Currently, the City obtains local
groundwater from the Santa Monica Basin via five wells. These wells are located within
the Arcadia and Olympic Sub - basins, and can produce approximately 3,000 acre feet
per year (AFY). Additionally, there are five wells located outside of the City limits in the
Charnock Sub -basin with a combined production capacity of approximately 6,000 AFY.
However, since 1995, the City has had to purchase most of its annual water supply
needs from the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) as the Charnock well field was shut
down due to methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) contamination. This supply is now being
used in the system after treatment at the Charnock Water Treatment plant. The total
groundwater production capacity from the Arcadia, Olympic, and Charnock sub - basins
is currently estimated at approximately 9,000 AFY.
Another study of the groundwater basin was recently performed by Richard C. Slade
and Associates, LLC (RCS). The study suggests the City may have additional local
groundwater opportunities within the Olympic, Charnock and Coastal Sub - basins. The
Coastal sub -basin has not been utilized as a groundwater source to date due to salt
water intrusion; additional treatment would be required to utilize water from this basin.
Additional efforts are needed to assess potential sites and derive the potential quality
and quantity of additional well production for the City's supply portfolio. Incorporating
the RCS study with the SWMP's evaluations and discussions, has led to the following
preliminary recommendations for additional local groundwater production and treatment
facilities. These preliminary recommendations are:
• Expansion of the existing Arcadia Water Treatment Plant
• Design and construct new Olympic Water Treatment Plant (Gillette /Boeing
Settlement Project)
• Rehabilitate old wells and drill additional new wells in the Olympic, Charnock and
Coastal Sub - basins
• Develop and implement improvements in treatment efficiency to reduce the
amount of water lost to brine disposal during treatment (reduction of brine water
losses from 18% to 9 %)
11
While additional engineering and hydrogeologic studies will be required to determine a
realistic production capacity for these wells, it is believed that the City could attain as
much as an additional 6,000 AFY of local water if all of these strategies were
implemented. Of course, an equivalent increase in local water treatment capacity is
required to deliver this water to the City's customers, requiring an increase in the
capacity of the Arcadia Water Treatment Plant and /or using settlement funds and other
sources to construct a new water treatment plant (currently referred to as the Olympic
Water Treatment Plant as it is designed to focus on treating water from the Olympic
sub - basin). The current approach for this future water supply strategy is reflected
graphically on Figure 4.
Figure 4. Groundwater Basins and Facilities
12
.enend
As Monica W @Os
i Existing Santa Monica Welis
fi Existing Water Treatment Facilities
E PfopoSed Water Treatment Facility
city of sanla Monica Boundary
i 9 Santa Monica Basin
Beyond the additional local groundwater opportunities described above, potential exists
for joint - development of nearby under - utilized groundwater basins, including the
Hollywood and Central Basins. These are multi - jurisdictional opportunities that will
require coordination between the City and the Los Angeles Department of Water and
Power and /or the City of Beverly Hills. Given the nature of institutional - related projects,
these opportunities are considered as more long -term water supply options and are not
included in the list of potential new groundwater opportunities available to the City to
meet its self- sufficiency goal by 2020.
Rainwater Harvesting and Stormwater Capture
Rainwater harvesting (the capture and onsite use of rainwater for landscape irrigation
purposes) offers minimal opportunity as an additional water supply within the City.
Santa Monica's Mediterranean climate is characterized by seasonal rainfall, with the
majority of rain falling in the winter months of November through March. Conversely,
landscape water demands are highest in the warmer, drier months of April through
September. Analyses were performed to evaluate and compare the potential for
rainwater harvesting based on average monthly precipitation data and monthly
landscape water demand for residential and commercial customers.
Results of the above analysis indicate that the potential for rainwater harvesting as a
supply option in Santa Monica is limited by the large size of cisterns and customers'
motivation to install them. For most residential and commercial customers in the City,
space is limited; therefore, it was assumed customers would install no more than 500
gallons of rain harvesting capacity. A cistern of this size is depleted quickly, even in the
wetter winter months. In the drier summer months, rainwater supply is minimal, and
when available, landscape irrigation demand far exceeds the capacity of the cistern
therefore depleting this supply rapidly. Residential cistern installation, even with a
rebate of $1,000 per cistern, has been minimally accepted by the City's customers.
Accordingly, it is estimated that the rainwater harvesting incentive program may provide
only 1 -2 AF per year.
13
Similarly, a City -wide stormwater capture program offers a seasonal, unreliable
additional water supply option for the City. A scenario was developed in which
stormwater captured through the City's storm drain system would be routed to the Santa
Monica Urban Runoff Recycling Facility (SMURRF) for distribution to landscape
irrigation customers. It is estimated that a City -wide stormwater capture program could
generate an additional 160 AF of supply per year. The costs for this program are not
yet developed.
Recycled Water
Currently, the City distributes approximately 85 AFY of recycled urban runoff to
customers for landscape irrigation and indoor commercial use through the SMURRF
and associated distribution system. The City does not operate a wastewater treatment
plant and thus does not have a local source for additional recycled water supplies.
However, the City could partner with adjacent agencies that currently produce recycled
water in order to bring additional recycled water supplies to its customers. The West
Basin Municipal Water District (WBMWD) operates a recycled water system that
terminates near Marina Del Rey, which may provide the City with a potentially feasible
source for recycled water. The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP)
also looked into utilizing this source and has prepared a master plan that suggests a
potential for connection at this same location.
A recycled water market study was performed to estimate the potential for recycled
water use within the City. Results of this study indicate that 350 AF of recycled water
could be used by the City's dedicated landscape irrigation customers that reside along
some key corridors into the City. Figure 5 proposes a potential recycled water
distribution system that focuses on delivering year -round recycled water to the City's
existing SMURRF facility and serves a number of customers along the way.
14
Figure 5. Proposed Recycled Water System Map
Existing Dedicated Landscape ® City Boundary
Irrigation Demand (AFY),' Existing Recycled Water Customers
g 6.5 Residential
6. 5 Non - Residential
5.1 - £+Non - Residential
8.4 - M Non-Revdential
A SMURRF Plant
City of Los Angeles
® ®® Potential System Westside
SMURRF Distribution System Main
15
Proposed Branch Lines
Proposed Connection from
®m West Basin Line to SMURF
Demand Areas
A - Main Line to Smurf
B t - South Airport Branch
B2 - North Airport Branch
C -Neilson Way Branches
D -Virginia Aan Park Branch
E - Colorado Ave Branch
F - Broadway Ave Branch
In this potential system, the City may be able to partner with LADWP to jointly fund a
new transmission and pumping system that connects to the WBMWD line and bring
recycled water to the southeast side of Santa Monica (Figure 6). The project would
require approximately 5 miles of pipe from its current point of termination. Establishing
the partnerships and agreements necessary to make this type of inter - agency program
a reality will require time, and this option should be considered a long -range strategy for
the City. It is unlikely that the City could deliver additional recycled water to its
customers before 2020.
Portfolio Options and Per Capita Water Consumption Targets
Implementation of the strategies described above (Option 1) suggest that the City can
meet its self- sufficiency goal through a combination of water conservation programs,
additional local groundwater production (Figure 6), and additional supplies from
rainwater harvesting and City -wide stormwater capture. In the future, the City may also
be able to establish additional recycled water supplies through inter - agency
partnerships with adjacent water agencies and municipalities. Figure 7 presents three
different options for obtaining water self- sufficiency. Details for each option are
presented in this section.
16
Figure 6. Water Supply and Demand Comparison Including New Supply Opportunities
Water Demand
18,000
16,000 ___ - - -_-
14,000 — — — _—_.� v
12,000
� 10,000 _- . - - - --
LL
9,000 Acre Feet
G 8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000 - - --
o --
`'O'l,J X019
Existing Supply
M °° - - ° Water Demand After Conservation
Projected additional supply
- needed for 2020 demand is --
approximately 5,000 AF
%t" Gap, 6,500
rocs Fors 1�0 ro8 tl
Year
17
5,000 AF
m
I
®°
`�o
O
- - - - - - Supply After Augmentation
Figure 7. Potential Portfolios
7000
6000
5000
4000
a
i
Q
3000
2000
1000
0
Potential Portfolios for Meeting the City's Sustainability Goal
(closing the 6,500 AFY gap)
Option 1: Staff Option 2: Proposed Option 3: Long Range
Recommendation Policy Considerations Regional Recycled Water
(135 GPCD) (123 GPCD) (133 GPCD)
Proposed Policy Considerations (New
Conservation Regulations)
9 Existing and Proposed Conservation
Programs
as Rain Harvesting and City -Wide
Stormwater Capture
Proposed Regional Recycled Water
■ Existing SMURRF Recycled Water
® Existing and Proposed Groundwater
Option 1
To implement Option 1, "Staff Recommendation," the City would close the gap of 6,500
AF and achieve water self- sufficiency by 2020 through increased activity in existing
water conservation programs, new water conservation programs, maximize new
groundwater supplies, new rainwater harvesting and stormwater capture programs
described above. In this scenario, it is estimated that the City's per capita water use
would be 135 gallons per capita per day (GPCD) in 2020. This portfolio should achieve
the City's goal of water self- sufficiency by the year 2020, but will fall short of the City's
current water use reduction target adopted in the 2010 Urban Water Management Plan
(UWMP) in response to Senate Bill x7 -7 (SBx7 -7). In contrast, the City's adopted target
per capita water use in 2020 is 123 GPCD.
In
The State formula for calculating GPCD is not the standard formula used in the water
conservation field. The standard formula divides the water used by the residents by the
number of residents. Following this formula residents are only using 86 GPCD. The
State formula divides all the water used by all of the customers (businesses, residents,
and landscapes) and divides that by the number of residents. This does not allow the
City to include the nearly 250,000 daily visitors to the City in the calculation.
Option 2
To implement Option 2, "Proposed Policy Consideration," the City would close the gap
of 6,500 AF, achieve water self - sufficiency and meet the SBx7 -7 target of 123 GPCD by
2020 through very aggressive water conservation programs and policies, limited new
groundwater supplies, new rainwater harvesting and stormwater capture programs
described above. In this scenario, it is estimated that the City's per capita water use
would be 123 GPCD in 2020.
In order to reduce demand to levels low enough to permanently achieve a per capita
water use of 123 GPCD, 2,880 AF of the City's potable water demand must be reduced
or offset by non - potable sources and new regulations requiring residential and
commercial property owners to retrofit plumbing fixtures, landscaping with water - saving
plants and irrigation, or banning sprinklers and lawns before 2020. Staff is asking for
Council's comments on the new policies proposed below by the Advisory Committee for
the SWMP. The proposed policies target specific customer categories that have the
highest potential for saving water.
• Ban sprinklers and lawns in residential properties - savings 1,280 AFY
• Ban sprinklers in the parkways but allow for hand - watering of street trees
• Require all hotels to retrofit plumbing fixtures to meet the City's current Green
Building Ordinance requirements
• Require landscaping to meet the City's current Green Building Ordinance
requirements before the sale of the property
• Require City -owned facilities and landscapes to reduce water use
19
Option 2 could reach the 123 GPCD goal but at a high cost to residents, businesses,
and the City to pay for the required retrofits and increased staffing to enforce the
requirements.
Option 3
To implement Option 3, "Long Range Regional Recycled Water," the City would develop
additional recycled water through regional inter - agency partnerships as a means of
reducing potable water use. This option should be considered a long range program
and should not be relied upon to meet an adopted per capita water use requirement. As
discussed earlier, it is unlikely that these partnerships could be established and the
infrastructure completed by 2020.
Recommendations
Option 1 is the portfolio recommended by staff. In light of this additional analysis, staff
also recommends that the City change its water use reduction target when it adopts an
update to its UWMP in 2015. Specifically, in its 2010 UMWP, in accordance with SBX7 -
7 the California Department of Water Resources' Methodologies for Calculating
Baseline and Compliance Urban Per Capita Water Use, the City calculated several
water use targets in accordance with the SBX7 -7 requirements. At the June 28, 2013
Council meeting, staff recommended Method 3 with a target of 141 GPCD, because it is
achievable based on the existing budget and staffing limitations for implementing
conservation programs and policies, water saving products available in the market,
willingness of customers to voluntarily conserve water by participating in numerous
conservation programs, and would not open the City up to possible litigation for failing to
meet the target by 2020. However, Council chose to formally adopt the stricter 20
percent reduction of 123 GPCD.
Since the formal adoption of the 123 GPCD target puts the City at potential risk for
litigation for waste and unreasonable use of water resources in 2021 and it does not
appear to be achievable, it is recommended that the 141 GPCD target be adopted in the
City's 2015 UWMP. This change is allowable under SBX7 -7 and reduces the City's
20
potential risk of litigation. At Council's direction, reducing overall water use a full 20
percent to achieve a per capita water use of 123 GPCD could still be an internal City
goal and implemented over a longer period of time beyond 2020.
Next Steps
As discussed, the SWMP is well on its way. Refinement to some of the program
opportunities, evaluation of hydraulic capacities, development of costs, and the
preparation of an accompanying rate study are the primary next steps. With the
Sustainable Water Master Plan approximately 70% complete and the current solid
financial position of both the water and wastewater funds, staff has placed additional
work on the water and wastewater rate study on hold until the options, approaches, and
programs described in this report are presented to Council. Council's recommended
sustainable water supply strategy will inform the rate study, which will commence in
FY2013 -14. The rate study is logically sequenced after the SWMP is completed, in
order to allow capital projects identified in the SWMP to be included in the rate study.
The rate study will be the subject of a future Council study session in the coming fiscal
year.
Financial Impacts & Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the
recommended action.
Prepared by: Gil Borboa, P.E., Water Resources Manager
Approved:
Forwarded to Council:
21
Rod Gould
City Manager
eIm t. V 'a w4i
m[ k[ o�n [wmabnr�a[nnk�tl<otrdUwvmk+ -vNt ;rah)
�naVAA,, C. 4i[a pioyirzlnuecrydSrAtf V4&4 -411 Voll
LADWP _ City of Los Angeles 7.3% increase Proposed
Golden State Water
Simi Valley
Western MWD
West Riverside
County
San Diego
City of San Diego
Burbank
City of Burbank
Newport Beach City of Newport
Beach
22,8% increase Effective 2011/12
10.0% increase Effective September 2010
7.75% increase 6th increase since 2007
13.5% increase Approved 6/10
18.6% increase
5000
X606
O
C?
4000
41
U 3000
R
L
g
MIR
0
Energy Intensity of Selected Water Supply Sources
in Southern California
S h r
& p°61