EXHIBIT 15-D
DRAFT MINUTES
Water Demand Committee Meeting
May 25, 2001
MEMBERS PRESENT: Directors Alvin Edwards, Kris Lindstrom, Ron Chesshire
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Stephanie Pintar, Emily Whitfield, David
Laredo, Darby Fuerst for IMAX credit discussion
OTHERS PRESENT: Dan Zamanek, Bill Lindstrom, Ray Cole, Walt Hess, Richard. Shermer, Mark Geyser, Paul Davis, Director Alexander Henson
(committee alternate, observing only)
I. Call
to Order
The meeting was called to order at
9:06 A.M. in the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District Conference Room.
II. Presentation of
Requests for Special Circumstances
Stephanie Pintar, Water Demand
Manager, summarized the projects under consideration and how they fit into a
request for Special Circumstances under District Rule 24 G. To begin, staff explained the origin of the
District’s factor for residential care facilities. The current 0.085 acre-feet annual water use
per bed was averaged from a sample of three residential care facilities that
offer “assisted living” service. When
the survey was done in 1995, staff was unaware of the different levels of
residential care. It was also not known
whether the samples had retrofit and to what extent, and there was no
information about outdoor water uses.
Dan Zamanek,
Development Specialist for Sunrise Development, presented background
information about Sunrise Development, Inc. and its facilities. Mr. Zamanek
deferred to Ray Cole, a representative of Lee and Associates, to address the
estimated water savings for Sunrise Assisted Living. Questions and discussion centered around the types of washing machines selected, faucets with
automatic shut-off features, ozone treated laundry water, shower flow with high
water pressure, and Microphor toilets. Mr. Walter Hess, Microphor
toilets, responded to questions concerning the commercial application of Microphor toilets.
Public comment was received.
The Committee recommended the
following conditions for Board consideration:
1.
Microphor toilets
should be required to have the positive flush attachment;
2.
The
Alzheimer unit should have mechanical automatic shut-off faucets;
3.
The
laundry facility should have a separate water meter.
Paul Davis, architect,
presented information about the Cypress Meadows Assisted Living project. Questions and discussion centered on the use
of well water for irrigation and possibly for laundry and toilet flushing also,
and whether a requirement for dual plumbing was reasonable. The long term viability of the well was
discussed. Public comment was received.
Mr.
Following discussion, the following
condition was recommended for Board consideration:
The building should be dual plumbed
for well water use in laundry and toilet flushing. It was not stated that the dual plumbing
should be employed at this time, but there should be the option of going to a
dual-plumbed system in the event that water use is higher than expected.
Monterey Hotel
Paul Davis presented the
Monterey Hotel project to the committee.
Mr. Davis indicated that the residential apartment portion of the
project did not need consideration for Special Circumstances as residential
water credits for the low flow appliances proposed are currently available. The proposed water saving
appliances keep the projected water use within the1.5 acre-feet of water
authorized by the City of
Mr. Davis presented the
estimated water savings for the Monterey Hotel, taking into consideration
installation of 1.0 and 0.5 gallon-per-flush toilets and ozone-treated recycled
laundry water. Additional water savings
will be achieved by the installation of water fixtures with lower flows than
the District requires and by using gray water from the laundry to water any
landscaping: No water credit was requested
for these items.
Questions and discussion
centered around enforcement of the limits on water use, what happens when a
jurisdiction has a negative allocation, how to manage the water use of the
proposed projects, and length of the review period. The applicants for all the projects assured
the committee that they are willing to do everything within their power to
maintain use within the limit. Mr.
The committee recommended that the
laundry be separately metered.
The committee discussed the need for
an annual review of all the special circumstances projects. Director Lindstom
suggested that a form be prepared by staff that would be completed and
submitted by the applicants annually.
The form would require water records for the past twelve months, and
would include a summary of the use and maintenance of fixtures, including a
report of any problems associated with the water saving technologies.
III. Discuss issues related
to current requests for Special Circumstances (Rule 24-G)
A. Staff stated that the District factor
for water use at assisted living facilities needs to be reviewed. Staff also expressed the need to update all
the District’s commercial water use factors.
The committee agreed
that there is a need to update the commercial water use factors. Discussion followed regarding the cost of
such a study, and it was recognized that the Fiscal Year 2001-2002 budget does
not include an adequate amount of money to pay for a comprehensive analysis. Director Lindstrom recommended that updating
the factors be included in the District=s strategic plan.
2.
Staff
asked the committee members if a written Board policy was needed to guide staff
on handling Special Circumstances cases.
The committee responded
by saying staff has acted appropriately.
Special Circumstances cases should be referred to the Water Demand
Committee and then go before the full board with a committee
recommendation. The committee indicated
that Special Circumstances requests could eventually go before the board as
consent items, but should be considered during public hearings for the time
being.
IV Discuss
committee presentation to Board of Directors
The committee decided unanimously to
submit the three projects to the full board and recommend approval with the
conditions.
V. Discuss increase in
incidences of unpermitted water fixtures to obtain
water credits
A. Director Chesshire told the committee that he had attended an
inspection with staff and witnessed unpermitted water
fixtures first hand. Staff explained
that fixtures are installed before the inspection so that they are documented
as water credits. The fixtures are then
removed to offset new water fixtures.
The committee
recommended that the District disallow outdoor fixtures and more than one
utility sink for onsite or transfer credit.
This should be adopted by resolution at some meeting in the near future.
VI. Discuss IMAX water
credits
1.
Staff
explained the procedure that was followed when the IMAX credit was issued. It was the same procedure that is followed when
a water permit is issued: There is an
active use on the site. The applicant
provided business records and City records and correspondence to substantiate
that there were legitimate uses on the site.
Staff reviewed the water use records and confirmed that there was water
use on the site, although it was minimal.
Staff also confirmed that there were auto uses and storage on the
site. District counsel David Laredo
pointed out that if a use can be identified and the District does not allow a
credit, the District could face a “taking” lawsuit. The credit that was given was for the lowest
Group I factor.
VII. Adjournment
A. The meeting was adjourned at 11:30
A.M.
U:\staff\word\boardpacket\2005\20050127\PubHrgs\15\item15_exh15d.doc