Water Distribution System Master Plan
December 8th, 2025
City of Fort Bragg
Agenda
• Introductions
• Treated Water Distribution System
• Purpose and Goals
• Master Planning Process
• Key Accomplishments
• Current Performance& Future
Considerations
• Capital Plan
• Conclusion & Summary of
Recommendations
Introduction
Senior Project
Manager
Alex Johnson
Principle-in-Charge
Philip Tiewater
Speakers
Chantell O’Neal
City Team
HDR Team
Project Manager - Assistant Director - Engineering
John Smith Director of Public Works
Heath Daniels Operations & Maintenance Supervisor
Diane O’Connor Assistant City Engineer
Allan Scott Technical Advisor
Scott Humphrey Technical Lead
Roger Null Technical Advisor
Joel Griffin Mapping/GIS
Linda Fisher Environmental/Programmatic EIR
Mark Stanley Geotechnical Assessment
Nathalie Beauvais Climate Impact Assessment
Morgan DeAngelis Risk Analysis/Risk Model
Treated Water Distribution System
• 41 miles of pipeline
• System Built (1960-2000s)
• 6 to 20 inches in diameter
• AC, PVC, DIP
• 4 Storage Tanks
• 1.5 to 1.6 MG
• 1 Pump Station and Pressure Zone
(EFBPZ)
This master plan assesses treated water distribution infrastructure starting at the treatment plant outlet and includes evaluation the following infrastructure:
Purpose and Goals
Purpose of the Master Plan
Assess the current & future
state
Identify near-term and longterm capital needs
Considerations: aging infrastructure, technological advances, community growth, and seismic, environmental, and climate risk.
Environmental
Risk/Climate Change
Geotechnical
Assessment
Master Planning Process
Hydraulic Model
Capacity Analysis
GIS Database
Risk Model
System
Improvements
Capital Improvement
Plan
Current
Near-Term
Build Out
Likelihood and
Consequence of
Failure
Asset Management
Analysis
Other Planning
Recommendations
Prioritization
Capacity
Operational
Asset Renewal
Developed new GIS Data Set
GIS foundation for Modeling
Assessments informed risk modeling
Modeled 3 capacity scenarios
Modeling Identified system improvements
Improvements packaged and prioritized
Other recommendations incorporated
Key Accomplishments
1. GIS database to support hydraulic modeling, risk analysis, and current and future capital planning
2. System hydraulic model
3. Current and future demand analysis
4. Build-out capacity analysis
5. Geotechnical & environmental risk analysis
6. Climate risk analysis
7. Risk assessment model
8. CIP plan, including pipeline replacement strategy
9. Analysis of potential funding opportunities
10. CEQA compliance strategy
11. Asset management strategy and recommendations for implementation Today - Existing Water
Distribution System
• Adequately satisfies current needs
• Performs well & in good condition
• Well-maintained
• Low break rates compared to other utilities
• Needs improvements to supply fire flows
• Reaching end of design life (next ~10
years)
• Can expect problems to become more
frequent
• Plan now for system renewal
Planning for the Future
Treatment Capacity, Fire Flows, Expansion
• Sufficient water treatment capacity for
current and likely future water demands
• Improvements to current fire flow capacity
• Willow Creek Pump Station fire pump upgrade
• Targeted pipeline improvements to address
existing deficiencies
• Operational Improvements
• Oak Street Isolation Valves
• Noyo Center water line
Planning for the Future
System Renewal
Targeted pipe replacement:
• Current information &
Conditions
• Hydraulic Model
• Risk Model
• Opportunistic pipe sampling
1% annual
replacement rate
recommended
Planning for the Future: Risks
Seismic activity, drought, wildfire, sea-level rise
1. Seismic Risk – Bridge crossings vulnerable to movement; consider ERDIP or articulating joints for critical lines
2. Densification – Soil spreading or groundwater shifts may cause settlement damage
3. Landslides & Bluff Erosion – Differential settlement or pipe stretching from slope failures
4. Soil Corrosivity – Coastal soils more acidic, increased pipe corrosion risk
5. Water Supply Resiliency Challenges
1. Increasing drought frequency and declining spring water availability
2. Rising salinity and sea-level impacts at surface water intakes
3. Continued evaluation of supply options is recommended Capital Plan – Next 5 Years
Priority CIP ID Project Name Driver Costa
1 PS-1 Pump Station Upsize Capacity or Fire
Flow Deficiency $8,141,000
2 V-1 Oak Street Valves Operational
Improvements $93,000
3 P-1
Cedar Street Water
Line Replacement
Capacity or Fire
Flow Deficiency $3,357,000
4 T-1 Tank 1 Upgrade Asset Renewal $8,955,000
5 P-2
North Fort Bragg Water
Main Extension
Capacity or Fire
Flow Deficiency $1,384,000
6 PL-1
System Renewal- Pipe
Replacement Asset Renewal b $2,830,000
7 O-1
Opportunistic Pipe
Sampling Other $69,000
8 O-2 CIP Update Other $110,000
9 O-3 CMMS Needs Analysis Other $39,000
a Project Costs Escalated for Inflation
b Budget reserved to meet system renewal goal. Projects to be identified based on condition and risk, or emergent issues Next 5 Year Sub-Total : $24,978,000
Capital Plan – 5 to 10 Years Priority CIP ID Project Name Driver Cost a 10 P-7
East Laurel Street Water Main
Replacement Capacity or Fire Flow Deficiency $354,000
11 P-3 Noyo Center Water Lineb Capacity or Fire Flow Deficiency $2,985,000 12 P-6
North Main Street Water Main
Replacement Capacity or Fire Flow Deficiency $4,016,000 13 P-14 East Alder Street Water Main
Replacement Capacity or Fire Flow Deficiency $470,000
14 P-10 Chief Celeri Dr Water Main Replacement Capacity or Fire Flow Deficiency $951,000 15 P-4
Noyo Point Road Water Main
Replacement Capacity or Fire Flow Deficiency $455,000
16 P-8 Maple Street Water Main Loop Capacity or Fire Flow Deficiency $206,000 17 P-5 East Elm Street Water Main Loop Capacity or Fire Flow Deficiency $145,000 18 P-9
East Chestnut Street Water Main
Replacement Capacity or Fire Flow Deficiency $330,000
19 P-11 Spruce Street Water Main Replacement Capacity or Fire Flow Deficiency $873,000 20 PL-2 System Renewal- Pipe Replacement Asset Renewal c $3,280,000 21 O-4 Opportunistic Pipe Sampling Other $80,000
22 O-5 CMMS Acquisition & Implementationc Other $191,000 23 O-6 CIP Update Other $127,000
5-10 Year Sub-Total : $14,463,000
a Project Costs Escalated for Inflation c Budget reserved to meet system renewal goal. Projects to be identified based on
condition and risk, or emergent issues
bP-3 is dependent on development at
the GP Mill site
• Purpose
• Assess the current & future state
• Identify near-term and long-term capital
needs
• Infrastructure – good condition, well
maintained, reaching the end of useful life.
• Expect efforts to replace or renew aging
infrastructure
• $39M of capital projects over the next 10 years
addressing aging infrastructure, fire flow, and City
growth
• Identified and prioritized to mitigate risk and to
maintain current levels of service.
Conclusion & Summary
of Recommendations
Questions
© HDR, all rights reserved.
Treated Water Capacity, Expansion, & Fire Flow
• Existing Demand: 1.01 MGD
• Near-Term Demand (next 10
years): 1.05 MGD
• Buildout Demand (> 10 years):
2.35 MGD
• GP Mill Site, and Annexation
areas
Notes on Demand Analysis:
• Assessed water usage data from June 2018 to May 2021
• The city averages 0.59MGD with low density residential using the most (41%) • Water loss for the City (23%) are above the national target (9-10%) but declining trend shows progress Risk Assessment
• Risk assessment done to prioritize capital
improvement decisions in the Master Plan
• Risk model developed to assign relative risk
score based on:
• Likelihood of Failure (LoF)
• Consequence of Failure (CoF)
Funding
Raw Water Supply Planning
• The City of Fort Bragg does not currently meet the supplier criteria that would require development of an Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) • Does not serve more than 3,000 customers
• Or supply more than 3,000 acre-ft of treated water annually • In the absence of a formal UWMP the City has taken measures to assess and address the adequacy and reliability of their raw water supply. • 2015 - Water-Supply Model – To evaluate water-supply scenarios • 2016 – Construction of the 45 acre-ft Summers Lane Reservoir • 2023 – Pipeline improvements, including pressurized pipe and pump station force main at Newman Gulch.
• 2025 – Preliminary Engineering Reports Established for three new 45-acre-foot reservoirs, building off existing water rights
Environmental Compliance
CIP ID's Expected LOE for CEQA Compliance
V-1 Exemption: Class 1
T-1 Exemption: Class 2
P-1, P-3, P-4, P-5, P-6, P-7, P-8, P-9, P-10, P-11,
P-12, P-13, PS-1, P-2, P-14
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration
P-15, P-16 Environmental Impact Report
• Class 1 Exemption: Existing facilities
• Class 2 Exemption: Replacement or reconstruction.
• Initial studies (IS):
• May result in either a negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration • Environmental impact reports (EIR):
• Required when significant impacts are found that cannot be mitigated to less than significant levels. Involve more evidence, process, time, and include a period of public review.
Capacity and Expansion
• Existing Demand: 0.70 MGD
• Near-Term Demand (next 10
years): 0.72 MGD
• Recent developments
including housing, retail, and
hotels. Annexation areas.
• Buildout Demand (> 10 years):
1.6 MGD
• GP Mill Site, and Annexation
areas
Notes on Demand Analysis:
• Assessed water usage data from June 2018 to May 2021
• The city averages 0.59MGD with low density residential using the most (41%) • Water loss for the City (23%) are above the national target (9-10%) but declining trend shows progress Geotechnical Evaluation & Risk
• City is located on a seismically active, uplifted coastal terrace • Seismic risk
o Not within a fault line.
o Differential movement especially at
bridge crossings may pose risk to
distribution
o Mitigation strategies may include:
▪ Use of articulating joints
▪ Earthquake Resistant Ductile Iron
Pipes (ERDIP) for critical
infrastructure
• Densification/Liquification
• Significant settlement due to soil
spreading or groundwater fluctuation
could damage system
• Land Slides & Bluff Erosion
• Differential settlement or pipe
lengthening due to landslides pose risk
to the system
• Corrosivity
• Terrace deposits are acidic (corrosive)
and become more so gradually closer
to the ocean.
Environmental Evaluation & Risk
• Flooding - The City is susceptible to flooding and severe winter storms. • Fire - significant fires have occurred in Northern California in the last few years and the City’s fire hydrant system is critical infrastructure for public safety
• Chemically impacted sites - Many of these sites are identified as having been remediated to meet standards set forward by regulatory agencies. • It should be noted that there may be residual chemically impacted soils that may require special testing and handling to determine material reuse or disposal. • The DTSC GeoTracker website should be referenced during future system upgrade or rehabilitation projects.
Environmental Evaluations
Climate Change Impacts
• Hotter temperatures
• Adds demand and stress to the
water system and exacerbates
wildfire threat to infrastructure
• Variability in precipitation
• May cause floods or droughts
• Sea level rise
• Increase risks of landslides and
erosion
• Increase in salt-water intrusion to
freshwater supply areas
Climate Change Mitigation
• Require varied and more adaptable
water management
• Water distribution assets which may
benefit the most from implementing
resilience strategies include:
• Pump station
• Mains
• Storage tanks
• Water treatment plant
Environmental Practices
• Water efficiency:
• Raw Water Line Replacement Project (Dewberry 2022) is upgrading critical infrastructure to improve reliability and efficiency of 2 mile section of aging raw water deliver pipeline • Oneka Seawater Desalination Buoy Pilot Study designed to enhance resilience and efficiency of the water supply system of Fort Bragg
• Increasing reservoir storage to improve long-term water supply reliability and enhance drought resilience
• Regulating new and retrofitted landscapes for better water efficiency through new standards • Conservation:
• Identified priority species
• Removal of fish passage barrier in 2016 from Newman Gulch • City plans to continue considering ways to protect these populations T-1 Tank 1 Replacement
CIP Year: ??
Description: Replace existing Tank 1 at the
Water Treatment Plant.
Project Driver: Aging Infrastructure – repairs
necessary
Expected Env. Compliance: Exemption:
Class 2 for Replacement or Reconstruction
Projected Project Cost: $8,955,000
Funding Opportunities: WIFIA, EDA Public
Works, EPA SRF