HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - City Council - Meeting Date: 10/7/2003 * PLEASE NOTE: Since the Glendale City Council does not take formal action at
the Workshops, Workshop minutes are not approved by the City Council.
MINUTES
CITY OF GLENDALE
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP
October 7, 2003
1:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Mayor Elaine M. Scruggs, Vice Mayor Thomas R. Eggleston, and
Councilmembers Joyce V. Clark, Steven E. Frate, David M. Goulet,
H. Phillip Lieberman, and Manuel D. Martinez
ALSO PRESENT: Ed Beasley, City Manager; Pam Kavanaugh, Assistant City
Manager; Rick Flaaen, City Attorney; and Pamela Hanna, City
Clerk
1. UTILITIES INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Mr. Ken Reedy, Deputy City Manager; Mr.
Roger Bailey, Utilities Director, Ms. Sharon Ibarra, Senior Management Assistant.
OTHER PRESENTERS: Mr. Doug Kukino, Environmental Resources Director; Mr. Dan
W. Meyer, P.E., Vice President, Black & Watch; Mr. Fair L. Yeager, P.C., CH2MHILL;
and Mr. Thomas Galeziewski, P.E., HDR
This is a request for City Council to review and provide direction on the utilities
infrastructure maintenance plan and needs assessment studies.
Timely replacement and/or rehabilitation of the city's utilities infrastructure will enhance
the quality of life for Glendale residents. In addition, by implementing these
recommendations, the city will remain in compliance with regulatory standards. This, in
turn, will assure the best quality water supply for Glendale residents. The City Council
approved the contracts for needs assessments related to the Water Master Plan, the
water distribution system, and the sewer collection system.
The city has provided water and wastewater services for more than 50 years. The
utilities infrastructure includes water treatment plants, wells, reservoirs, water
distribution, wastewater collection, effluent distribution, and wastewater treatment
plants. All of these assets vary in life and value and in maintenance and replacement
costs. As the city nears build out, the focus will be on citywide maintenance of the
existing infrastructure.
1
Evaluations of the water and wastewater systems have recently been completed in
order to provide staff with some level of detail about the future needs of the systems.
Additional resource allocations will be necessary to maintain the infrastructure in which
the city has already invested and which has been required for development. This cost
will vary in the future to include pipe replacements and system enhancements related to
changes in development and continued build-out of the remaining system. Many of
these areas will require adjustments to the maintenance costs and also some changes
in the Capital Improvement Plan. Failure to provide adequate resources will have an
effect on the long-term life of the infrastructure and a potential for increased costs,
disruption of service and city liability.
The following consultants were hired and have completed their respective needs
assessments:
Black & Veatch —Water Master Plan
CH2MHill —Water Distribution System
HDR— Sewer Collection System
Glendale residents will benefit from the expansion, replacement and/or rehabilitation of
the water and wastewater infrastructure.
Staff will be presenting the capital investment needs and rate impacts for the utilities
infrastructure asset management plan at the November 4, 2003, Council Workshop.
Mr. Reedy reviewed a brief history of Water and Sewer Utilities, noting Council directed
staff in the early 1990's to organize a Citizens Committee known as Project WATERS.
He stated, in 1995, the Committee recommended the city sell some of its capacity at
the regional sewer treatment facility at 91st Avenue and Buckeye Road and build a local
facility to treat and recharge water resources. He said, today, the city faces three
challenges: 1) the need to increase the city's ability to treat the increasing volume of
flows related to growth; 2) the need to continually improve the process that it owns to
meet regulatory requirements; and 3) the need to maintain the infrastructure already in
place.
With regard to the maintenance of infrastructure, Mr. Reedy stated the Federal
government has implemented new laws and regulations and the Government
Accounting Standards Board adopted GASB 34 in 1999 requiring the city to track the
cost of acquiring, owning, operating and maintaining all public works infrastructure. He
said GASB 34 also requires inventories of all assets and evaluation of maintenance
spending to determine that the condition of the assets is at or above minimum
acceptable standards. Furthermore, the United States Environmental Protection
Agency will be adding new regulations for sewer systems to prevent sewer system
overflows. He noted the EPA also regulates the National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations adopted in 1971, which are legally enforceable standards that apply to all
public water systems, and the Clean Water Act that applies to all discharges from
sewer systems. He said, locally, they are also required to obtain permits from and meet
the requirements for Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, Arizona Department
of Water Resources, and Maricopa County Department of Health Services.
Mr. Reedy explained that, due to the city's rapid growth, the average age of the city's
2
system is quite young by national standards. He said, however, as the city approaches
build out, maintenance of the system will become its biggest responsibility. Each year
the city will need to rehabilitate the oldest and most problematic systems or it will get
behind and large costs will loom ahead. He assured Council that both Utilities and Field
Operations are working with Engineering to coordinate maintenance and rehabilitation
issues to make the most of opportunities to combine construction projects and system
repairs. He stated they will attempt to minimize costs and traffic disruptions by doing all
repairs in one project and working with other utilities, such as cable telephone, gas and
electric companies.
Mr. Reedy explained the needs assessment they conducted looked at systems needed
for growth and expansion, as well as the ongoing costs of keeping existing systems
functioning within regulatory requirements. He explained most piping systems are
assumed to have a useful life of 30 to 50 years, noting many of the systems in the older
parts of the city are reaching that age. To complicate the evaluation process, he
explained changes in standards and planning and zoning requirements resulted in
increased flows that were not anticipated when the pipes were installed. He said many
of the pipes are not in need of rehabilitation, so much as they are undersized and
inadequate for the current flows. He noted some materials used in the past were also
not as durable as expected, resulting in a loss of integrity and premature failures.
Mr. Meyer stated the consultants have been working over the past two years to prepare
the utilities infrastructure needs assessment. He explained their ultimate goal is to
establish a program to ensure clean, safe, reliable and sustainable water and sewer
services for this community for generations to come. He stated the objective of the
needs assessment was to establish the conditions of the existing utility infrastructure,
identify the cost of improvements, develop a replacement and rehabilitation schedule,
support existing and future development, develop future CIP projects, implement
security enhancements, and enhance the quality of life for Glendale residents.
Mr. Bailey stated the Utilities Department serves approximately 230,000 residents with
approximately 58,000 service connections, two water treatment plants with an average
daily flow of 40 million gallons per day, two waste water treatment plants with an
average daily flow of 10 million gallons and over 1,300 miles of water and sewer pipe
lines. He noted the department employs only,126 full time employees. He stated the
city also owns 13.5 million gallons at the 91st Avenue treatment plant. He identified
some of the departments challenges, including an aging infrastructure, increased
regulatory standards, rapid population growth and an increasingly complex water
system.
Mr. Meyer presented the Water Master Plan, explaining it provides a forward looking
plan by which the Water Utility can support existing and future development, assist in
developing future capital development projects, and enhance the quality of life for
Glendale residents. He stated they looked at water quality and quantity, operational
flexibility, institutional complexities and costs. He said the city's renewable water
resources must be sufficient to meet demands and a drought management plan must
be in place. He stated additional water production and distribution infrastructure is
needed to support growth and high quality water is necessary to protect the public's
health. He reviewed a chart showing the supply and demand of surface water
resources for 2002 and at build out, stating surface water resources are fully utilized at
build out.
In response to Vice Mayor Eggleston's question, Mr. Meyer explained SRP supplies
water to certain areas of the community they have defined as being on irrigation or "on
3
project". He said the areas are basically south of the Arizona Canal. Mr. Reedy noted
once an area is developed and turned over to the city, the water resources once used
for irrigation purposes are turned over to the city, treated and turned over to residents.
Councilmember Goulet asked what will the city's population be at build out and at what
point is build out expected to occur. Mr. Meyer explained the population predictions
they used came from the city's General Plan which anticipates build out at 264,000
people in 2025. Mr. Reedy said, however, the city has no way of accurately predicting
when it will reach build out. He said, based on current growth rates, the city will likely
reach build out prior to 2025.
Mr. Meyer stated the study also focused on water quality issues, explaining the city is
responsible for meeting more stringent regulatory standards and higher consumer
expectations.
Councilmember Lieberman asked if the study looked at the city's quantity of water and
how the current drought will affect the city in the future. Mr. Reedy said the city has
monitored its water resources for the past several years as this is the seventh year of
the continuing drought. He noted SRP reduced the allocation once available to the city
to two-acre feet per acre. He said the city has been able to meet its requirements every
year and an adequate supply currently exists. He stated, however, they are preparing a
drought management plan should future situations call for resource management
measures. Councilmember Lieberman asked how much excess capacity does CAP
have and how many wells have been reopened. Mr. Reedy stated the city has not
reopened wells because most of them have quality problems. He said staff is looking at
what to do about the high nitrate levels in some of the wells since additional well
capacity will be necessary in the future to meet peak day requirements.
Councilmember Martinez asked Mr. Reedy to comment on what the city is doing with
regard to drought management. Mr. Reedy said the city has done a number of things
to reduce its demand for water, including an audit of the park system. He said citizens
are not being asked at this time to reduce their usage, however, restrictions, ranging
from alternate day watering to complete prohibition of outdoor water usage, could be
imposed in the future. He stated the city's Water Conservation Coordinator is working
to educate citizens on what they can do to wisely use water. Councilmember Martinez
asked if the city uses effluent when possible. Mr. Reedy responded yes, noting
Arrowhead Ranch uses treated effluent to water its medians and golf courses. He
pointed out, once the lakes are full, the water has to be consumed every day because
there is no other place to store it. He said additional recharge capacity will be added in
the future since about three million gallons of effluent are produced every day.
Councilmember Clark pointed out the population figures in the 2001 and 2003 studies
performed by Black & Veatch remained constant at 264,000 people. She said,
however, the projected average number of accounts in 2011 increased from 65,450 in
the 2001 study to 66,820 in the 2003 study. She said projected total water sales
increased from 16,957,000 to 17,609,800, an approximate gain of 700,000 gallons.
She asked if the accounts refer to both residential and commercial accounts. Mr.
Reedy explained the differences reflect the fact that the 2001 study was based on the
old General Plan whereas the 2003 study was based on the new General Plan.
Councilmember Clark asked if the 1,400 new accounts are expected to be on the
commercial side. Mr. Reedy responded no. Councilmember Clark asked if the Coyotes
Arena and Cardinal Stadium were figured into the 2003 consumption figures. Mr.
Reedy explained the analysis for consumptive use looked at the arena and stadium and
whether or not the city can meet their need. He said a more challenging issue is the
4
instantaneous peak in demand that will be created by the Cardinal Stadium during a
Super Bowl game.
Mr. Reedy assured Mayor Scruggs that the city will not be building capacity to meet a
need that seldom occurs. He said the city's storage capacity meets the necessary
requirements.
Councilmember Lieberman asked what percentage of the CAP allotment is currently
being utilized. Mr. Kukino said the city currently uses 100 percent of its CAP allocation
and orders excess or unused CAP water as well because of the drought.
Councilmember Lieberman noted Hoover Dam is presently at 55 percent of capacity.
He asked if there has been any mention of reducing the amount of excess capacity or if
the city's allocation could be reduced if the amount of water at Hoover Dam does not
increase in the future. Mr. Kukino stated the Bureau of Reclamation and the CAWCD
have indicated the CAP water supply should be adequate for the next 10 to 20 years.
Councilmember Lieberman pointed out Colorado Springs, on the other side of the dam,
has been subjected to severe water restrictions. Mr. Reedy explained a system of
dams and reservoirs on this side of the Continental Divide supply water to Lake Mead.
He said Colorado Springs was in an extreme drought situation, with reserves below 20
percent capacity. He pointed out, however, the reserves were filled within one year as
a result of heavy snowfall and rain. He also mentioned that Colorado Springs is east of
the Continental divide and not in the Colorado River water shed.
Mr. Meyer said, as a result of the comprehensive analysis, several infrastructure
improvements were recommended, including a re-rating of Pyramid Peak Treatment
Plant, creation of a Zone 4 Water Treatment Plant; and a process upgrade and
expansion of the Cholla Water Treatment Plant. He said, given the drought conditions,
the city has to ensure groundwater will be available. He stated the master plan
ultimately recommends a phased building of three groundwater treatment plants with
each plant having a daily capacity of 10 million gallons.
Councilmember Clark asked if the city previously discussed groundwater treatment
plants. Mr. Reedy responded not in a detailed manner. He said, historically, the city
has not had to treat groundwater. He noted the surface water treatment plants were
constructed, in part, due to the high nitrate levels in the city's water supply. He said,
however, there is an increasing need for additional groundwater capacity to meet peak
day requirements. He explained the groundwater treatment plants are necessary to
remove the nitrates from the well water. Councilmember Clark noted the state
mandated all cities to get off groundwater by 2025. Mr. Reedy clarified the cities are
not mandated to get off groundwater, but that they not consume more groundwater than
they recharge. Councilmember Clark asked to what extent the city intends to utilize
groundwater. Mr. Reedy said the city intends to use a piping system to collect and
pump water from the wells that already have a good production capacity to a local
treatment facility.
Councilmember Lieberman noted the water in the well at 53rd Avenue and Orangewood
measured 104 degrees. He asked for examples of nitrate levels and well capacities.
Mr. Meyer said, while the 53`d Avenue and Orangewood well is available, the city does
not currently utilize the well because of the temperature of the water. Mr. Reedy
pointed out the nitrate level at that well is below the maximum acceptable contaminate
level. He said the city will use wells that meet drinking water requirements without
treatment, but additional capacity will have to come from wells that do not meet the
necessary requirements. He assured Councilmember Lieberman that the city always
chlorinates well water.
5
Councilmember Frate commented on the expense involved in removing nitrates. Mr.
Reedy agreed removing the nitrates will increase the cost of bringing the wells online,
stating, however, it represents the least expensive solution for meeting short term need.
Councilmember Clark asked if the city can increase its CAP allocation. Mr. Reedy
stated the CAP allocation will be increased by approximately 3,000 acre feet per year
through the GRIC agreement which they hope to finalize in the near future. Mr. Kukino
noted Arizona submitted an application to the Secretary of Arizona asking for 3,053
acre feet of additional CAP water. Mr. Reedy explained one acre foot equates to
326,000 gallons. Councilmember Clark asked if it would be more cost effective to build
three groundwater treatment plants or purchase additional CAP water. Mr. Reedy
explained the city will be able to locate the groundwater treatment facilities specifically
where the demand exists. He said the cost of CAP water is related to its transmission,
explaining the city would have to add more pipelines in order to achieve adequate
transmission capacity. He assured Councilmember Clark that it is more cost effective
to build the groundwater treatment plants than it is to build additional capacity at the
CAP plant and additional transmission capacity. Mr. Kukino pointed out the city will
need both CAP water and groundwater to fulfill future demands.
Mayor Scruggs stated the city's current population is approximately 230,000. She
asked for confirmation that the steps being proposed are necessary for the city to serve
the anticipated increase of 34,000 people. Mr. Reedy clarified the proposed plan takes
into account all residential, industrial and commercial development.
Councilmember Clark referred to the figures cited in the previous studies, asking if the
proposed steps are in response to approximately 1,400 more accounts and an
additional 700,000 gallons of water. Mr. Reedy explained part of the rationale for the
groundwater treatment plants is that some of the city's water supply is not available at
certain times of the year.
Mr. Reedy confirmed for Mayor Scruggs the city does not have a problem meeting
current demand. Mayor Scruggs asked if the new groundwater treatment plants will be
located in the area where growth is anticipated to occur. Mr. Reedy responded no,
noting one will be located north of the Arizona Canal to provide off-project water. He
explained the city currently uses SRP water off-project during certain times of the year,
which the city is required to repay within 30 days. Mr. Kukino stated the city currently
has 12 million gallons of capacity in wells, therefore the groundwater treatment plants
will treat the city's existing wells as well as another 18 million gallons per day of
groundwater. He explained the city currently uses excess CAP water because it is fairly
inexpensive and is a renewable resource. He stated, however, excess CAP water is
not likely to be available in another 15 years. Mayor Scruggs said, since her coming
into office, the city has celebrated the closure of groundwater wells. She stated the
wells will now be reopened and the water will be treated. Mr. Kukino noted the city has
substantial stored water credits upon which it can draw once the plants are constructed.
Mayor Scruggs asked where the two other plants would be located. Mr. Reedy said
staff's recommendation is to locate one adjacent to or at the new water treatment plant,
however, the third plant has not yet been cited. He stated the first plant will be required
within the next five years. Mr. Meyer estimated each plant to cost approximately $25
million. Mayor Scruggs asked if any other options are available to the city. Mr. Reedy
said other options exist, however, staff believes the plants will be necessary to provide
adequate water supplies to meet the General Plan requirements. Mayor Scruggs
pointed out staff previously advised against purchasing additional water rights as part of
a settlement, asking what has since changed that now requires three new treatment
6
plants. Mr. Reedy stated the plants will prevent the city from having to build other
capacity. He acknowledged the city used to celebrate closing its wells, stating,
however, the city now recharges water and has built up credits. He noted other cities in
the valley are buying credits from groundwater replenishment districts at a much higher
cost. Mr. Kukino said, had the city not decided ten years ago to build the water
reclamation facilities, the city would be looking for additional surface water which is
more difficult to find.
Councilmember Lieberman pointed out the Lower Colorado Three State Compact ends
in approximately 2017, at which time California will have the right to sue for a larger
percentage of water on the Colorado River.
Mr. Reedy clarified the Zone 4 Western Area Water Treatment Plant is planned in the
next three years, however, the two remaining groundwater treatment plants are
scheduled to come online between 2010 and 2014.
Mr. Kukino explained they are planning far into the future because the city will slowly
lose its opportunities to drill new wells or recapture old wells as development occurs.
Mr. Meyer clarified for Vice Mayor Eggleston that the Cholla Plant has a current peak
capacity of 28 million gallons per day and the Pyramid Peak Plant currently delivers a
peak capacity of 32 million gallons per day. He noted the Cholla Treatment Plant goes
off line one month of the year, reducing the city's water supply by 28 million gallons per
day.
Mayor Scruggs asked why staff forecasts higher household demands. Mr. Reedy
clarified the higher total demand is attributed to increased commercial and industrial
development.
Councilmember Martinez asked what risks are associated with other options the city
could choose to take. Mr. Reedy explained each option has different risks and costs
associated with them. He said staff believes the proposed plan represents the
cheapest and most cost effective solution. He pointed out future changes to the
General Plan could effect the amount of water needed in a given area. He explained
the city might not be able to meet demand on the highest peak days of the year if the
groundwater treatment plants are not built. He stated the city will evaluate whether
there is still a need for the treatment plants as the time to construct them draws closer.
In response to Mayor Scruggs' question, Mr. Reedy clarified the city is building for peak
day demands, not instantaneous peak demands. Mr. Kukino explained the peak day
capacity in 2003 totaled 78 million gallons, which required using all of the city's wells
and the Cholla and Pyramid Peak Treatment Plants to capacity. He said the number of
gallons needed in the future is estimated to reach 103 million per day.
Councilmember Clark asked if the $25 million per plant cost estimate is reliable. Mr.
Reedy said, while there will always be changes in costs, they have provided their best
cost estimate. He noted the cost estimates are inflated, depending on the year
construction is expected to occur. Councilmember Clark asked Mr. Reedy what other
options were explored. Mr. Reedy referenced a study conducted when the Western
Area Water Treatment Plant was sited, stating it considered several options, including
expanding the Cholla and Pyramid Peak Treatment Plants and whether or not a new
facility should be built and where. He said Black & Veatch modeled the information
contained in the study and calculated the cost and believes the proposed plan to be the
most cost effective solution.
7
Mr. Reedy confirmed for Vice Mayor Eggleston that the city would have a capacity of
about 105 million gallons per day if the groundwater treatment plants are built versus a
current capacity of 78 million gallons per day, including 12 million gallons per day in
groundwater. He noted January is the city's lowest demand month of the year, running
somewhere in the high 30 million gallons per day range. He said, while the plants do
not run at peak levels all year long, they have to build to meet the maximum demand.
Councilmember Frate asked how cities plan to provide for areas they annex. Mr. Meyer
said Peoria, for instance, has a lot of unused CAP water, but is looking at groundwater
resources. He stated other west valley communities are considering purchasing water
from the new American Water Treatment Plant because they do not have the resources
to build their own plant. He said other communities require developers to provide water
before they are allowed to build their developments.
Mayor Scruggs questioned why the old General Plan was used when a draft of the new
General Plan was available by the time the study started. She asked what is in the
currently funded CIP. Mr. Reedy said all projects currently underway are in the
currently funded CIP, including the Pyramid Peak re-rating, Phase I of the Zone 4
Water Treatment Plant, and $7 million for the Cholla Water Treatment upgrade. In
response to Mayor Scruggs's question concerning actual future capacity, Mr. Meyer
offered to provide a break down of capacities at each of the water treatment plants and
groundwater wells that do not require treatment. He pointed out the Pyramid Peak
plant and groundwater capacities have to increase to make up for the loss of water
when the Cholla Plant is taken off line. He noted the CAP has restrictions on the
amount of water that can be taken in any given month. Mayor Scruggs asked that,
before this item returns to workshop, staff identify on a chart what can reasonably be
expected to happen as well as what might happen and the probability that it will
happen.
Councilmember Clark said the water needs assessment appears to revolve around
three basic areas, growth, rehabilitation of the system, and federal mandates. She
asked staff to include information on the degree to which impact fees offset costs
related to growth. She said she would also like to see prioritizations in each of the three
areas.
Councilmember Frate encouraged the consultants and staff to present the information
in a very basic, easy to understand way.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 3:30 p.m.
8