City of Mountain View
RECYCLED WATER
FEASIBILITY STUDY UPDATE -
DRAFT REPORT
PROJECT 18-71
FINAL | March 2022
Attachment 1
City of Mountain View
RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY
FINAL | March 2022
CONTENTS | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW F INAL | MARCH 2022 | i
pw://Carollo/Doc ume nts/Cli ent/C A/Mount ain Vie w/901 0C0 0/Deliv er able s/Final R WFS (02212 2)/C over-TOC-AB B Contents
Chapter 1 - Introduction and Background 1-1
1.1 Introduction 1-1
1.2 Local Study Area Characteristics 1-2
1.2.1 Study Area 1-2
1.2.2 Hydrologic Features 1-2
1.2.3 Climate 1-2
1.2.4 Climate Action Plan 1-3
1.2.5 Land Use and Population 1-5
1.3 Wat er Supply, Characteristics and Facilities 1-7
1.3.1 Water Sources and Water Quality 1-7
1.3.2 Water Supplies and Demands 1-8
1.3.3 Water Facilities 1-10
1.4 Wast ewater Characteristics and Facilities 1-12
1.4.1 Wastewater Facilities 1-12
1.4.2 Current and Proj ected Wastewater Generation 1-12
1.5 Recycled Water Facilities 1-15
1.5.1 Recycled Water T reatment Facilities 1-15
Chapter 2 - City Recycled Water System 2-1
2.1 Introduction 2-1
2.2 City of Mountain View Recycled Water Facilities 2-1
2.2.1 Existing Recycled Water Users 2-2
2.2.2 Recycled Water Rights 2-8
2.2.3 Dual Plumbing Ordinance 2-9
2.2.4 Recycled Water for Irrig ation Ordinance 2-9
2.3 Previous S ystem Recommendations 2-9
Chapter 3 - Project Alternatives Analysis 3-1
3.1 Introduction 3-1
3.2 Infrastructure Sizing Assumptions 3-1
3.2.1 System Sizing 3-1
3.2.2 Operational Storage 3-2
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CONTENTS ii | MARCH 2022 | FIN AL
3.2.3 Peaking Factors 3-2
3.3 Description of Alternatives 3-3
3.3.1 Alternatives 0 and 1 3-9
3.3.2 Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 3-9
3.3.3 Sub-altern atives – Dual Plumbed Expansion Options 3-10
3.4 Tank Siting Options 3-11
3.5 Basis of Costs 3-12
3.6 Alternatives Cost Comparison 3-13
3.7 Alternatives Evaluation 3-15
3.8 Preliminary Recommended Alternative 3-17
Chapter 4 - Recommended Project, Funding & Financing 4-1
4.1 Introduction 4-1
4.2 Model Update and Development 4-1
4.2.1 Infrastructure Sizing and Perform ance Criteri a 4-1
4.3 Recommended Proj ect 4-7
4.4 Preliminary Cost Estimates for Recommended Project and Preferred Future Expansion Alternatives 4-13
4.5 Funding and Financing Recommendations 4-14
4.6 Funding Source Identification 4-14
4.6.1 PAYGO Funding 4-14
4.6.2 Financing Options 4-15
4.7 Funding Sources and Uses 4-19
4.7.1 Funding Sources 4-19
4.7.2 Funding Uses 4-21
4.8 Funding Plan Options 4-23
4.8.1 Pay-As-You-Go and Reserve Funding 4-23
4.8.2 Debt Financing 4-23
4.9 Comparative Cash Flow Analysi s 4-24
4.9.1 Projected Annual Cash Flow under PAYGO Funding 4-24
4.9.2 Projected Annual Cash Flow under Conventional Financing 4-25
4.10 Sensitivity Analysis 4-25
4.10.1 Unit Cos t Calculation 4-25
4.10.2 Sensitivity Analysi s Results 4-25
CONTENTS | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW F INAL | MARCH 2022 | iii
Appendices
Appendix A References
Appendix B Letters of Support
Appendix C Recycled Water Use Agreement
Appendix D City of Mountain View Dual Plumbing Ordinance A
ppendix E Irrigation Ordinance
Appendix F Existing and Future Recycled Water U sers
Appendix G Recommended Project Capital Costs and Cash Flow Appendix H Paygo Funding Option Tables
T ables
Table 1.1 Climate Data for the City of Mountain View 1-5 Table 1.2 Historical Water Supply Production 1-8
Table 1.3 Water Dem and by Customer Sector for 2016 -2020 1-9 Table 1.4 Water Dem and Proj ections (2025-2 040) 1-9
Table 1.5 Proj ected Water Supply Production 1-10
Table 1.6 Historic and Projected Wastewater Flows 1-12 T
able 2.1 Recycled Water System Improv ement Recommendations and Status 2-10 T
able 3.1 Alternatives Modeling Criteria Summary 3-2
Table 3.2 Quantitative Comparison of Alternatives 3-4
Table 3.3 Tank Siting Options 3-11
Table 3.4 PVC Pipeline Unit Cost Assumptions 3-12
Table 3.5 Booster Pump Station Unit Cost Assumptions 3-12 Table 3.6 Storage Tan k Unit Cost Assumptions 3-13
Table 3.7 Estimate of Capital Costs of Project Alternatives 3-13 Table 3.8 Estimate of Unit Costs of Project Alternatives 3-14 Table 3.9 Qualitative Comparison of Alternatives 3-16
T
able 4.1 Summary of Average Annual Demands (AFY) 4-8
Table 4.2 Summary of Proposed Facilities by Phase 4-8
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CONTENTS iv | MARCH 2022 | FINAL
Table 4.3 Estimated Capital Cost for the Recommended Project 4-13 Table 4.4 State and Federal Funding Programs 4-18
Table 4.5 City of Moun tain View Existing Recycled Water Rates by Meter Size 4-20 Table 4.6 Annual Recycled Water Sal e Proj ections by Scenario 4-20 Table 4.7 Scenario 1 (3 Sites per Year) – Projected Annual Cash Flow 4-22 Table 4.8 Scenario 2 (6 Sites per Year) – Proj ected Annual Cash Flow 4-22 Table 4.9 Scenario 3 (8 Sites per Year) – Projected Annual Cash Flow 4-23 Table 4.10 Unit Cost Calculation 4-25
Table 4.11 Unit Cost Sensitivity Analysis 4-25
Figures
Figure 1.1 City of Mountain View Location 1-3
Figure 1.2 Study Area 1-4
Figure 1.3 City of Moun tain View Land Use Map 1-6
Figure 1.4 Existing Recycled Water S ervic e Area 1-11
Figure 1.5 Palo Alto RWQCP Service Map 1-13
Figure 1.6 Palo Alto RWQCP Flow Schematic 1-14
Figure 2.1 Existing Recycled Water Distribution System 2-3 Figure 2.2 Existing Recycled Water Customers 2-5
Figure 2.3 Monthly Average Water Use 2-7
Figure 2.4 Maximum Day Water Use for Each Month Compare d to the Current RWQCP Allocation 2-7
Figure 3.1 Alternative Overview 3-7
Figure 4.1 Preferred Alt ernativ e 4-3
Figure 4.2 Preferred Alt ernativ e Performanc e Criteria 4-5 Figure 4.3 Preferred Alt ernativ e Customers 4-9
Figure 4.4 North Bayshore Customers 4-11
ABBREVIATIONS | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022 | v
Abbreviations
ac-ft acre-feet
A&E Architectural & Engineering
AFY acre-feet per year
AWPS advanced water purification system
Cal Water California Water Company
CAP Climate Action Plan
CCF one hundred cubic feet of water
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CIMIS California Irrigation Management Information System City or Mountain View City of Mountain View
COLD Cold Freshwater Habitat
CWAP California Water Action Plan
CWSRF Clean Water State Revolving Fund
DDW California Division of Drinking Water
DIF development impact fees
DMF dual media filtration
DWR Department of Water Resources
ERW "enhanced" recycled water
ETo evapotranspiration
FRSH Freshwater Replenishment
ft foot (feet)
fps feet per second
FYE fiscal year end
GGRP Greenhouse Gas Reduction Program
GMP Groundwater Management Plan
GO general obligation
gpm gallons per minute
GSA Groundwater Sustainability Agency
GWR Groundwater Recharge
HIO/R&D high intensity office/research and development
hp horsepower
in inches
IPS irrigation pump station
LF linear foot
MDD maximum day demand
MG million gallons
mgd million gallons per day
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | ABBREVIATIONS vi | MARCH 2022 | FINAL
mg/L milligrams per liter
MIGR Fish Migration
Mountain View City of Mountain View
MUN Municipal Supply
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
O&M operations and maintenance
PAYGO pay-as-you-go
PHD peak hour demand
psi pounds per square inch
REC-1 Water Contact Recreation
REC-2 Noncontact Water Recreation
RWFS Recycled Water Feasibility Study
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
RWQCP Regional Water Quality Control Plant
SCVWD Santa Clara Valley Water District
SFPUC San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
SGMA Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
SPWN Fish Spawning
sq ft square foot(feet)
SRF State Revolving Fund
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
TDS total dissolved solids
UWMP Urban Water Management Plan
VW Valley Water
WARM Warm Freshwater Habitat
WILD Wildlife Habitat
WRCC Western Regional Climate Center
WRF Water Recycling Funding
CHAPTER 1 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW F INAL | MARCH 2022 | 1-1
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
1.1 Introduction
This Report updates the City of Mountain View’s (Mountain View or City) 2014 Recycled Water Feasibility Study (RWFS) due to several recent changes in the community that could affect the overall reuse strategy. The main changes addressed in this 2022 RWFS update include:
• New dual plumbing ordinance: In 2016, the City passed a city-wide ordinance for all new commercial building developments larger than 25,000 square-feet (sq -ft) (excluding those that have a residential component such as hotels) to be dual plumbed with potable and recycled water. This assumes recycled water could be made available throughout the city.
• Preference to focus on two high growth areas: The 2014 RWFS analyzed reuse at a high level throughout the entire City. This study focuses on reuse in the City’s recommended expansion areas – the East Whisman and the North Bayshore areas. • Advanced/changed treatment technologies/practices at the r egional wastewater treatment facility: The advanced water purification system (AWPS) and associated system operational changes at the Regional Water Quality Control Plant ( RWQCP) are projected to be completed in 2024 and are considered in this 2022 update. • Water Reuse Agreement with Valley Water: A partnership was enacted in late 2019 between the Cities of Mountain View, Palo Alto, and Valley Water to allocate water use throughout Santa Clara County. The supplies for existing and future recycled water users in Mountain View will need to be reviewed and updated to ensure recycled water use is within the Agreement terms.
• Update the hydraulic model: The hydraulic model for the recycled water system was developed as part of the 2014 RWFS. The model was updated for the changes that occurred as part of this RWFS u pdate, based on customer and billing data supplied by the City.
• Recycled water storage analysis : Storage is an imperative part of any reuse system to help ease the supply versus demand timing.
This RWFS is formatted as follows:
Chapter 1 – Introduction; local area characteristics; water supply, characteristics , and facilities; wastewater characteristics and facilities; and regional recycled water characteristics and facilities Chapter 2 – City recycled water characteristics and facilities, recycled water use requirements, recycled water market, and previous system recommendations.
Chapter 3 – Recycled water project alternatives analysis.
Chapter 4 – Recommended project, funding, and financing.
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 1 The City contracted with Carollo Engineers to provide engineering services to conduct this RWFS.
The reference materials used to develop this study are summarized in Appendix A.
Letters of support for the City’s recycled water program are contained in Appendix B.
1.2 Local Study Area Characteristics
1.2.1 Study Area
Mountain View is situated in Santa Clara County in the southwestern portion of the Bay Area in Northern California. Figure 1.1 shows the location of the City of Mountain View in its regional context. The main study area includes the two high growth areas of the City , East Whisman and North Bayshore. Figure 1.2 shows the City boundary, which is also their water service area, and the location of the RWQCP in Palo Alto. The entire City is the study area when considering the new plumbing ordinance and its effects.
1.2.2 Hydrologic Features
Mountain View is located within the Santa Clara Valley Groundwater Basin (Department of Water Resources [DWR] Basin 2-9.02) as defined in the San Francisco (SF) Bay Basin Plan (RWQCB, 2007). Its associated sub basin is the Santa Clara Groundwater Sub-Basin. This Basin and Sub-Basin are also known as Coyote Valley (or Coyote), per the SF Bay Basin Plan.
The main drainage feature of the Santa Clara Valley Groundwater Basin is Coyote Creek, which enters the Coyote Valley from the southeast and flows northwesterly through Santa Clara Valley before entering San Francisco Bay. Other major drainages in the Basin include the Guadalupe River, Los Gatos Creek, San Tomas Creek, Saratoga Creek, Calabazas Creek, Stevens Creek, and Permanente Creek. These drainages originate in the Santa Cruz Mountains (RWQCB, 2003).
Between the early 1900s and the mid-1960s, groundwater levels in the basin declined more than 200 feet due to over-pumping. Since that time, the need for pumping has been reduced by the importation of water through the Hetch Hetchy and South Bay Aqueducts, allowing groundwater levels to rebound (DWR, 2004).
Natural recharge in the basin occurs principally through streambed infiltration and direct percolation of rainfall. Because Mountain View’s service area overlies only the confined portions of the aquifer, recharge occurs outside the City’s service area, to the west (natural recharge only) and south (natural and artificial recharge).
1.2.3 Climate
Mountain View’s climate is semi-arid and temperate, with an average annual temperature of 58 degrees Fahrenheit (ºF), an average low of 47 ºF and an average high of 69 ºF. The average annual precipitation is 15 inches with rainfall generally occurring between November and April (Urban Water Management Plan [UWMP], 2015). Table 1.1 presents climate data in the area, including average values of temperature, precipitation, and evapotranspiration. 1-2 | MARCH 2022 | FINAL
CHAPTER 1 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW F INAL | MARCH 2022 | 1-3
1.2.4 Climate Action Plan
Mountain View developed a Climate Action Plan (CAP) to “measure, monitor, and mitigate the effects of climate change in the City”. As a precursor to the CAP, in 2012 the City developed a Greenhouse Gas Reduction Program (GGRP) in conjunction with the City’s 2030 General Plan.
The CAP discusses the potential impacts of climate change (e.g., extreme weather, more frequent flooding, sea level rise) and identifies greenhouse gas reduction strategies the City could implement to address the gap between the reductions likely to be achieved through the GGRP and those needed to meet the City's adopted targets.
Figure 1.1 City of Mountain View Location
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 1 1-4 | MARCH 2022 | FINA L
Figure 1.2 Study Area
CHAPTER 1 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW F INAL | MARCH 2022 | 1-5
Table 1.1 Climate Data for the City of Mount ain View
Climate
Parameter
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Total
ETo,
(inches)(1,2)
1.15 1.62 3.08 4.64 5.58 6.37 6.88 6.47 4.78 3.68 1.66 1.24 47.2 Average
Temperature
(ºF)(3)
49.5 52.5 54.0 57.2 60.4 64.4 65.8 66.2 66.0 62.1 55.4 50.0 58.6 Average
Rainfall
(inches)
(4)
3.22 2.88 2.31 1.00 0.39 0.09 0.02 0.05 0.18 0.70 1.81 2.77 15.4 Notes:
(1) ETo = evapotranspiration based on standard grass as reference. (2) Data from California Irrigation Management Information System (CIMIS) for San Benito (Station No. 126); San Benito experiences similar weather to Mountain View (Mountain View, 2011a). (3) Data from Moffett Field National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) weather station. (4) Data for Palo Alto from the Western Regional Climate Center (WRCC), monthly averages for the period of record from 9/1/1953 to 12/31/200 5; City of Mountain View data was not available from WRCC.
1.2.5 Land Use and Population
The City encompasses approximately 6,500 acres of land area, not including roads and other rights-of-way. Mountain View is a community with a service population estimated at 79,772 as of 2020 (Mountain View, 2021), with a mix of land uses, including single - and multi-family neighborhoods, commercial centers, and industrial districts. By 2040, the water service area is projected to reach 110,630 residents and 120,780 jobs (Mountain View, 2021 ).
Land use from the City’s Approved 2030 General Plan is illustrated on Figure 1.3. The General Plan was adopted by City Council on July 10, 2012.
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 1 1-6 | MARCH 2022 | FINA L
Figure 1.3 City of Mountain View Land Use Map
CHAPTER 1 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW F INAL | MARCH 2022 | 1-7
1.3 Water Supply, Characteristics and Facilities
Mountain View purchases approximately 8 4 percent of its water from the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) through the Hetch Hetchy system and approximately 10 percent from Valley Water (VW) (formerly Santa Clara Valley Water District) . The remaining supply comes from local groundwater wells and recycled water from the RWQCP (Mountain View, 2021).
Most of the City is served by Mountain View’s municipal water system. A small number of customers in the City are served by the neighboring California Water Company ( Cal Water). The City also provides water to a Federally-owned housing development located in an unincorporated enclave near the intersection of Moffett Boulevard and Middlefield Road.
1.3.1 Water Sources and Water Quality
1.3.1.1 Surface Water
Most of Mountain View’s supply is derived from SFPUC, with less than 10 percent each provided by Valley Water, local groundwater, and recycled water. The SFPUC supply originates predominantly from the Sierra Nevada, but also includes treated water produced by the SFPUC from its local watersheds and facilities in Alameda and San Mateo Counties. The Hetch Hetchy water from the Sierra Nevada does not require filtration prior to introduction into the potable distribution system. The remaining surface water sources are also of high quality. SFPUC water sources are low in total dissolved solids (TDS) and hardness.
VW imports water from the Sierra Nevada through the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, captures local surface water in its reservoirs, and recharges local groundwater basins. Local and imported surface water is t reated at VW facilities and distributed to retail suppliers or used for groundwater recharge. Water from VW is also of high quality, though with slightly higher TDS and hardness than the SFPUC water.
The City’s service area lies mainly within the Permanente Creek Watershed. Beneficial uses for inland streams include Cold Freshwater Habitat (COLD), Warm Freshwater Habitat (WARM), Fish Spawning (SPWN), Wildlife Habitat (WILD), Fish Migration (MIGR), Water Contact Recreation (REC -1), Noncontact Water Recreation (REC-2), Freshwater Replenishment (FRSH), Groundwater Recharge (GWR), and Municipal Supply (MUN). Despite their designation as a potential municipal supply, the local surface waters are not used as sources for potable water supply by the City.
1.3.1.2 Groundwater
The City operates four groundwater wells which help to supplement their surface water supplies.
They also own an inactive irrigation well which has been out of commission since 2008. General groundwater quality in the local aquifer is monitored by DWR .
In 2014, the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) was signed into law implementing a framework for sustainable groundwater management. SGMA requires sustainability plans to be implemented for medium and high priority basins. The objective of these plans is to implement balanced levels of pumping and recharge into these basins within a 20-year timeframe.
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 1 1-8 | MARCH 2022 | FINA L
Valley Water is the manager of the Santa Clara Groundwater Sub -Basin, in accordance with authority granted by the Santa Clara Valley Water District Act (California Water Code Appendix, Chapter 60). In 2016, VW became a groundwater sustainability agency (GSA) for the Santa Clara and Llagas subbasins, the two primary subbasins in Santa Clara County. Under SGMA, DWR has identified the Santa Clara subbasin as medium priority based on criteria that includes population, projected growth, number of wells, irrigation acreage, and groundwater reliance and impacts (Santa Clara Valley Water District [SCVWD], 2016). The subbasin is not considered in overdraft.
The Santa Clara Valley area has historically experienced high amounts of land subsidence, and subsequent flooding issues, due to over pumping. Flood control implementations and groundwater recharge strategies have improved basin stability in recent decades.
1.3.2 Water Supplies and Demands
1.3.2.1 Current and Historical
The City’s historical water supply is shown in Table 1.2. The City has been tracking supply data since 1975 and has noted changes in customer base, increased plumbing efficiencies, and water conservation due to periodic droughts (Mountain View, 2021).
Table 1.2 Historical Water Supply Production
Supply Source
Historical Water Supply (AFY)
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
SFPUC 7,731 8,196 8,353 8,203 8,747
Valley Water 893 942 1,032 1,012 1,099
Groundwater 117 138 165 249 190
Total Potable 8,741 9,276 9,550 9,464 10,036
Recycled Water 472 454 380 420 420
Total Supply 9,213 9,730 9,931 9,884 10,456
The use of recycled water in the City has been important for several years. Recycled water allows the City to save its drinking water for the highest and best uses and also provides a reliable back up supply for non -potable use when potable supplies are limited during drought. The City has built out the Shoreline Golf Course and much of the North Bayshore area with a recycled water system to help strengthen the City’s water supply portfolio . Table 1.3 presents the City’s water demand by customer sector for 20 16 through 2020. As shown in this table, residential customers (single-family and multi- family) represent approximately half of total use, followed by landscape customers and commercial / institutional use .
CHAPTER 1 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022 | 1-9
Table 1.3 Water Demand by Customer Sector for 2016-2020 Customer Sector Annual Water Use(1) (AFY)
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Potable Water Use
Single Family Residential 2,159 2,299 2,414 2,401 2,689 Multi-Family Residential 2,798 2,903 2,913 2,864 3,063
Commercial, Industrial,
Institution al 1,754 1,750 1,804 1,773 1,365
Landscape Irrigation 1,494 1,763 2,070 2,050 2,367
Construction 3 3 2 3 7
Recycled Water Use
Commercial 0 4 4 4 3
Landscape Irrigation 315 391 343 377 363
Construction 2 1 1 1 1
TOTAL 8,523 9,113 9,551 9,473 9,856
Notes:
(1) Data from the City’s 2020 UWMP.
1.3.2.2 Projected Future
Based on the City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan, future water use p rojections were developed for three scenarios that considered the base case as well as accounting for the new plumbing code and conservation. The City recognizes the importance of water conservation, and as such has implemented a number of measures, such as metering and education/outreach, in order to cont inue the sustainable use of their precious water resources. Projected water demands for the three scenarios from 2025 to 2040 are summarized in Table 1.4. Scenario B was selected by the City as the preferred scenario.
Table 1.4 Water Demand Projections (2025-2040)
Customer Sector
Projected Water Demand(1) (AFY)
2025 2030 2035 2040
Scenario A (base case) 12,679 13,485 14,288 15,894
Scenario B (plumbing codes) 12,058 12,548 13,064 14,163 Scenario C (plumbing codes and conservation) 11,825 12,164 12,530 12,929 Notes:
(1) Data from the City’s 2020 UWMP.
Based on the City’s demand projections, t he City’s projected water supplies, by source, for the years 2025 through 2040 are summarized in Table 1 .5. Recycled water use was not projected to increase in the City’s 2020 UWMP pending completion of the advanced water purification system and this Feasibility Study addendum. .
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 1 1-10 | MARCH 2022 | FINAL
Table 1.5 Projected Water Supply Produc t ion
Supply Source Projected Water Supply (AFY)(1)
2025 2030 2035 2040
SFPUC 10,154 10,664 11,160 12,259
Valley Water 1,176 1,176 1,176 1,176
Groundwater 280 280 280 280
Total Potable 11,610 12,100 12,616 13,159
Recycled Water 448 448 448 448
Total Supply 12,058 12,548 13,607 14,163
Notes:
(1) Data from the City’s 2020 UWMP.
1.3.3 Water Facilities
The City’s water system has three pressure zones - Zones 1 and 2 (lower elevations) are served by SFPUC water, whereas Zone 3 receives treated water from VW. The City has four potable water storage reservoirs with a total operational capacity of 14.3 million gallons (MG) (Mountain View, 2011c). The City also has three wholesale water connections, three pump stations, and four active groundwater supply wells. The City’s potable water distribution system currently consists of approximately 172 miles of pipelines, ranging in diameter up to 27 inches.
The RWQCP receives and treats all of Mountain View’s wastewater. Recycled water from the RWQCP currently supplies about 5 percent of the City’s water needs. Recycled water from the RWQCP is currently conveyed via a purple pipe system to irrigation customers in the North Bayshore portion of Mountain View (i.e., areas north of Highway 1 01). The current recycled water service area within Mountain View’s boundaries is shown o n Figure 1.4.
CHAPTER 1 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022 | 1-11
Figure 1.4 Existing Recycled Water Service Area
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 1 1-12 | MARCH 2022 | FINAL
1.4 Wastewater Characteristics and Facilities
The City of Mountain View’s wastewater is collected and conveyed to the RWQCP located in Palo Alto, which serves the cities of Palo Alto, East Palo Alto, Mountain View, Los Altos, the town of Los Altos Hills, and Stanford University . The RWQCP partners agreement states the City of Palo Alto is the owner and operator of the plant, with the City of Mountain View as a major partner. This agreement, and agreements with East Palo Alto Sanitary District, Stanford University, and Los Altos Hills, requires all six agencies to proportionately share in the costs of building and maintaining the facilities. The service area map for the RWQCP is shown in Figure
1.5. 1.4.1 Wastewater Facilities
The RWQCP has been a full secondary treatment facility since 19 72 when it became a regional facility. In 1975, limited treatment was added to make the plant a partial Title 22 disinfected tertiary treatment facility. All tertiary recycled water produced by the RWQCP meets California Title 22 disinfected tertiary recycled water standards. A process flow schematic of the current treatment process is shown in Figure 1. 6.
The RWQCP has initiated an upgrade to the tertiary plant with an advanced water purification system (AWPS). See Section 1.5.1 for additional informa tion on the RWQCP recycled water system.
The RWQCP discharges to two receiving waters: South San Francisco Bay and Matadero Creek.
Approximately 95 percent of the treated wastewater is discharged to the South San Francisco Bay. The remaining five percent of the treated wastewater is discharged to the Emily Renzel Marsh Pond where it flows through an outfall to Matadero Creek. During dry months, a small portion of the effluent is produced into tertiary recycled water and used by Palo Alto and Mountain View.
1.4.2 Current and Projected Wastewater Generation
Mountain View’s actual wastewater flows from 2015 to 2019, as well as actual and projected flow from the entire RWQCP service area from 20 15 to 2040, are summarized in Table 1.6. The projected dry weather flows for the entire RWQCP service area are anticipated to increase to
20.5 mgd by 2040. Based on the treatment processes’ design criteria and historical performance, it is anticipated that the existing facilities will provide adequate capacity to meet dry weather and maximum month flows into the future (2055) assuming the same level of treatment is required. Higher levels of treatment would require additional facilities.
Table 1.6 Historic and Projected Wastewater Flows
Area Average Dry Weather Wastewater Flow (mgd)(1)(2)(3) 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Mountain
View 6.03 6.19 7.06 6.66 7.26 10.2 10.4 10.5 10.7 -
RWQCP
Service
Area
17.40 18.10 18.50 17.40 18.45 18.50 18.91 19.50 20.00 20.50 Notes:
(1) 2015-2019 data provided by the City of Palo Alto.
(2) Dry weather timeframe is May 1 to October 31.
(3) 2020-2040 data from the Draft Valley Water Master Plan.
CHAPTER 1 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022 | 1-13
Figure 1.5 Palo Alto RWQCP Service Map
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 1 1-14 | MARCH 2022 | FINAL
Figure 1.6 Palo Alto RWQCP Flow Schematic
CHAPTER 1 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW DRAFT | MARCH 2022 | 1-15
1.5 Recycled Water Facilities
1.5.1 Recycled Water Treatment Facilities
The tertiary facilities at the RWQCP are a sid e-stream process and recycled water is only produced and stored on an as-needed basis. As shown in Figure 1. 6, the RWQCP currently can produce recycled water in two ways. In both cases, tertiary treatment begins with dual media filtration (DMF) and is followed by either:
• Recycled water plant filtration and chlorination at 4.5 mgd capacity ( existing production capacity) or
• UV disinfection at 4.3 mgd capacity assuming one bank in service, or 6.45 mgd capacity assuming all three banks in service (one channel of the UV system is dedicated to future recycled water production). Note that UV production is currently offline. A capacity of
4.3 mgd is a potential capacity, requiring a CIP to connect with the storage t ank.
In order to increase the recycled water quality and reduce total dissolved solids (TDS) levels, t he RWQCP began design to upgrade the tertiary plant with the addition of an advanced water purification system (AWPS). The AWPS includes microfiltration and reverse osmosis and is initially sized at 1.125 mgd capacity. The AWPS water is planned to be blended with the tertiary recycled water to produce 2.25 mgd of enhanced recycled water with an optimal TDS of approximately 400 – 500 ppm. Construction is anticipated to be completed at the end of 2024.
The AWPS is being designed to be expandable to a treatment capacity of 2.25 mgd, and when blended with the tertiary water would produce 4.5 mgd of enhanced recycled water. The City of Palo Alto has indicated that th e enhanced recycled water is planned to ultimately replace the tertiary recycled water production .
Water rights for the recycled water are discussed in Chapter 2.
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 1 1-16 | MARCH 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left Blank -
CHAPTER 2 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW F INAL | MARCH 2022 | 2-1
Chapter 2
CITY RECYCLED WATER SYSTEM
2.1 Introduction
The regional recycled water information and facilities are outlined in Chapter 1. This chapter focuses on recycled water characteristics and facilities specific to the City of Mountain View (City or Mountain View).
2.2 City of Mountain View Recycled Water Facilities
Recycled water has been available from the Regional Water Quality Control Plant ( RWQCP) for wetlands enhancement and landscape irrigation since 1975. In 1980, Mountain View’s Golf Course (Shoreline Golf Links) began using disinfected secondary recycled water from the RWQCP, conveyed through two 12 -inch diameter pipelines near the shore. The pipelines discharged into the golf course’s Northwestern Pond. A potable water feed as well as rainwater during the winter also fed the pond, allowing blending of the treated effluent with potable water.
The Shoreline Irrigation Pump Station (IPS), constructed at the same time, supplied the irrigation systems of the golf course and Shoreline Regional Park from either the ponds or a nearby potable water pipeline. This original recycled water system was converted to tertiary about 1981 and is referred to as the Shoreline Irrigation System and operates as its own pressure zone in the current recycled water facilities’ operation.
In 1987, the tertiary effluent water pipeline from the RWQCP was extended from the Northwestern Pond to the Shoreline IPS, allowing direct supply of recycled water without needing to route the recycled water through the ponds. Use of this system was suspended in 2001 due to failure of the tertiary effluent water pipeline. The failure occurred in sensitive habitat, and therefore, the pipeline from the RWQCP was not repaired.
In 2003, a portion of the City’s and the RWQCP’s “program to expand” the regional recycled water system, the Mountain View/ Moffett Field Area Reclaimed Water Pipeline Project”, was initiated. As part of this project, a new pipeline was completed in 2009 to serve recycled water to the existing Shoreline Irrigation System and new customers in the North Bayshore business area of Mountain View. Since 2009, recycled water has been delivered to multiple users directly from the RWQCP.
In 2010, the golf course removed three ponds and the remaining storage/source of supply is only from Pond E (Pond 4). The Shoreline IPS pumps from Pond E (Pond 4), supplying the golf course with recycled water. The Shoreline irrigation system remains as its own pressure zone and is tied to the IPS. The 2009 pipeline along with the distribution system feeding the North Bayshore area is referred to as the Primary Recycled Water System or primary zone. This network operates as its own pressure zone independent of the Shoreline Irrigation System. Figure 2.1 illustrates the existing recycled water distribution system.
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 2 2-2 | MARCH 2022 | FINA L
The pipeline constructed in 2009 was sized for future expansion into the Moffett Field Area as well as other feasible locations in the Mountain View service area.
As part of the 2014 Recycled Water Feasibility Study (RWFS), a hydraulic model was developed by Carollo. In 2017, as a part of the Recycled Water System Surge Analysis, also conducted by Carollo, the model was updated to include added customers. The model’s database of customers has been further updated to include customers added since 2017 as a part of this study. In addition, a field inspection of the IPS and a desktop evaluatio n of the existing distribution system were conducted to evaluate the conditions at Shoreline Park. The pump station was identified as nearing the end of its useful life and was estimated at five years remaining life. Also, the golf course distribution system had several joint failures and point repairs from 2003 to the present. A number of recommendations were defined by Carollo and provided to the City for both the pump station and the pipeline, many of which have been completed since 2014 or are in the process of completion .
2.2.1 Existing Recycled Water Users
Title 22 disinfected tertiary Recycled water is distributed from the RWQCP to some of the City’s largest water customers in the North Bayshore area. Customers may use recycled water for a variety of uses approved by the CA Division of Drinking Water ( DDW) such as landscape and agricultural irrigation, construction water, water for industrial purposes, impoundments (fountains), indoor toilet and urinal flushing , and makeup water for cooling towers and on -site reuse.
As of April 2021 there were a total of 52 existing recycled water users in the City. Figure 2.2 shows these existing users.
For the year of 2019, the total recycled water demand for the City was approximately 393 acre feet (ac-ft) while the recycled water supplied from the RWQCP was estimated at 4 20 ac-ft.
Figure 2.3 shows the average daily use in the City for each month from 2016 through 2019.
Based on monthly recycled water reports from the RWQCP, the existing recycled water customers in Mountain View used an average of 1.2 million gallons per day ( mgd) under maximum day demand (MDD) conditions during summer months. This falls well below the recycled water agreement peak flow allotment of 3 mgd allocated from the RWQCP. Further discussion on the City’s recycled water rights is included in Section 2.2.2. Figure 2 .4 shows the maximum daily use in the City for each month from 2016 through 2019.
UT
UT
"=)"=)"=)"=)
"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)
Shoreline
Slough
Charleston
Slough
Mayfield
Slough
San Francisco Bay
View
Slough
Mountain Stevens Creek
Jogel
Slough
Shoreline
Lake
HUFF
AVE
KÍ
KÍ
KÍ
Shoreline Ponds
Meter
ALTA
AVE
MARINE WAY
STIERLIN CT
CRITTENDEN LN
SPACE PARK WAY
SHORELINE BLVD
CHARLESTON RD
SHOREBIRD WAY
GARCIA AVE
PEAR AVE
MACON AVE
AMPHITHEATRE PKWY
Palo Alto
RWQCP
Irrigation PS
Supply from
RW, Ponds,
or Potable
INDEPENDENCE AVE
RENGSTORFF AVE
OLD MIDDLEFIELD WAY
W MIDDLEFIELD RD
30''
24''
12''
10''
8''
18''
4''
16'' 32''
2''
20''
8''6''
6''
6''
24''
6''
12''
6''
20''
4'' 10''
12''
8''
30''
6''
6''
24''
6''
6''
Disclaimer: Features shown in this
figure are for planning purposes and
represent approximate locations.
Engineering and/or survey accuracy
is not implied.
Data Sources: City of Mountain View,
ESRI
O
0 0.50.25
Miles
Last Revised: February 23, 2022 pw://IO-PW-INT.Carollo.local:Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Mountain&space;View/9010C00/Data/GIS/Figure 2.1 Legend
"=) Pump Station
UT Reservoir
Existing Pipeline
Expansion Areas
City Boundary
Figure 2.1 Existing Recycled Water Distribution System System CHAPTER 2 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 2 2-4 | MARCH 2022 | FIN AL
-This Page Intentionally Left Blank -
UT"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)
"=)"=)"=)"=)
"=)"=)"=)
Jogel
Slough
Shoreline
Lake
HUFF
AVE
KÍ
KÍ
Shoreline Ponds
Meter
ALTA
AVE
MARINE WAY
STIERLIN CT
CRITTENDEN LN
SPACE PARK WAY
SHORELINE BLVD
CHARLESTON RD
SHOREBIRD WAY
GARCIA AVE
PEAR AVE
MACON AVE
AMPHITHEATRE PKWY
Irrigation PS
Supply from
RW, Ponds,
or Potable
INDEPENDENCE AVE
RENGSTORFF AVE
OLD MIDDLEFIELD WAY
W MIDDLEFIELD RD
MOFFETT BLVD
Disclaimer: Features shown in this
figure are for planning purposes and
represent approximate locations.
Engineering and/or survey accuracy
is not implied.
Data Sources: City of Mountain View,
ESRI
O
0 0.40.2
Miles
Last Revised: February 25, 2022 pw://IO-PW-INT.Carollo.local:Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Mountain&space;View/9010C00/Data/GIS/Figure 2.2A Legend
"=) Pump Station
UT Reservoir
Existing Pipeline
Expansion Areas
City Boundary
Existing RW Customers
Demands (afy)
> 3
3 - 10
10 - 25
> 25
Figure 2.2 Existing Recycled Water Users
CHAPTER 2 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 2 2-6 | MARCH 2022 | FIN AL
-This Page Intentionally Left Blank -
CHAPTER 2 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022 | 2-7
Figure 2.3 Monthly Average Water Use
Data provided from the RWQCP Monthly Reclaimed Water Reports.
Figure 2.4 Maximum Day Water Use for Each Month Compared to the Current RWQCP Allocation
Data provided from the RWQCP Monthly Reclaimed Water Reports.
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 2 2-8 | MARCH 2022 | FIN AL
2.2.2 Recycled Water Rights
The original driver behind developing a recycled water program served by the RWQCP was to reduce the flow of wastewater effluent to San Francisco Bay and reduce potable wat er demands.
In recent years, interest in expanding recycled water use throughout Santa Clara County has driven up demands in the region. This section discusses the history of recycled water use agreements that impact the amount available to the City of Mou ntain View. The RWQCP partner agreement was discussed in Chapter 1.
2.2.2.1 Contract between the City of Palo Alto and the City of Mountain View The First Amended and Restated Contract No. C059999 b etween the City of Palo Alto and the City of Mountain View for the MV /Moffett Area Reclaimed Water Pipeline Project (referred to as ‘Agreement’) (first instated in 2005 , later re-stated in 2007 , and amended in 2017) delineates the terms between the two entities related to recycled water use. The Agreement governs the Ci ty and the other partners’ rights to recycled water produced by the RWQCP and provides that each partner is entitled to “acquire at its expense wastewater for reuse,” and that, if demands exceed the available supply, “the supply shall be allocated in propo rtion to each party’s percentage of wastewater input flow to the total plant flow” (Basic Agreement Recitals, section C). In 2017, the Agreement was amended (Amendment No 1) to extend the term of the Agreement to 2060 and add language clarifying the commit ments each partner has towards operation and maintenance of the recycled water portion of the system. The Agreement is included in Appendix C. Bullets below outline the major points of the Agreement.
• City of Mountain View recycled water allocation: 3 mgd, peak flow rate . • Cost: None unless allocation is exceeded.
• Agreement term: Until 20 60 (note that this may be terminated earlier in the event grant/SRF funding is not provided at a rate anticipated by either party) . • Additional Agreement Partners: The City of Los Altos.
2.2.2.2 Partnership Agreement to Advance Resilient Water Reuse Programs in Santa Clara County
This partnership agreement was enacted in late 2019 by the Cities of Palo Alto and Mountain View and Valley Water to allocate funds for th e AWPS and extend water reuse programs throughout Santa Clara County. Major components of this agreement are outlined in the bullets below:
• Agreement partners: City of Palo Alto, City of Mountain View, Valley Water . • Valley Water shall have the right to rec eive a minimum annual average flow of 9 mgd, or minimum daily flow of 5.86 mgd, of effluent from the RWQCP (known as the Effluent Transfer Option). Mountain View a minimum annual average of 2.5 mgd of enhanced recycled water (from approximately 3.25 mgd tr eated wastewater). Palo Alto a minimum annual average of 1.0 mgd enhanced recycled water (from approximately
1.3 mgd of treated wastewater).
• In the event of insufficient flows, the minimum volumes above are reduced proportionally, up to 30 percent reduction for Mountain View and Palo Alto. • Valley Water has thirteen years from the enactment of this agreement to exercise the Effluent Transfer Option.
CHAPTER 2 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022 | 2-9
• The agreement does not identify what proportion of Valley Water’s 9 mgd comes from Mountain View , Palo Alto, or others, To date, only Los Altos has added onto the agreement, committing 60 -100 percent of their wastewater. • Agreement term:
- Effective for a maximum of 63 years from startup of the AWPS (not to exceed 76 years from the effective date of this Agreement).
- If Valley Water elects not to use their Effluent Transfer Option , the Agreement shall expire after thirteen years.
2.2.3 Dual Plumbing Ordinance
In 2016, the City passed a Dual Plumbing Ordinance (Appendix D). Dual plumbing systems allow a building to utilize both potable and recycled water via two separate piping systems. Potable water is used for activities such as drinking and handwashing while recycled water is used for activities such as toilet flushing and irrigating. This ordinance applies to the following commercial developments:
• Commercial developments applying for a building permit after January 1, 2017. • Commercial developments larger than 25,000 square feet (sq ft). • Commercial buildings with a residential component (e.g. hotels, motels) are not required to install dual plumbing.
As discussed further in Chapter 3, this Ordinance will be incorporated into future recycled water planning throughout the City.
2.2.4 Recycled Water for Irrigation Ordinance
This article implemented a program that assists the Shoreline Regional Park Community (RPC) in preserving potable water. Customers to be served by recycled water within the Shoreline RPC were initially identified in a 2004 recycled water study. That study has been amended from time to time to add additional customers. These additional customers are notified by mail that a conversion to recycled water for irrigation purposes is required, along with the conditions of use, pricing, and construction schedule. The Irrigation Ordinance is contained in Appendix E.
2.3 Previous System Recommendations
The previous 2014 RWFS and 2017 Surge Analysis provided system improvement recommendations for the City’s recycled water system. Table 2 .1 summarizes the details of the recommendations, status, and timing for recommendation incorporation (near-term, mid -term or long-term item) for the pump stations and distribution system that was developed as part of the 2014 RWFS.
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 2 2-10 | MARCH 2022 | FINA L
Table 2.1 Recycled Water System Improvement Recommendations and Status Category Improvement Item Responsible
Party Status Timing
Shoreline IPS – Pump Station Install variable frequency drives (VFDs) to replace soft start drives on Pumps 2 and 3. City Moving forward Near-term Investigate vertical turbine pumps for
evidence of pump stuffing box leakage and
repair as needed. Pump packing may need
to be repaired or replaced.
City
Staff monitoring
(Likely accounted for during
pump repair/rebuild, see below
for pump maintenance)
N/A
Perform pump maintenance and
inspection program on a routine basis. City Performed on a routine basis by staff Routine basis
Confirm pump performance with name
plated conditions. Perform pump
capacity/pressure verification per
published data.
City Performed in general
maintenance activities Routine basis
Perform multiple-pump operation to verify
the maximum pump station capacity. City Performed and verified Complete Perform pump and motor vibration
analysis for Pump Nos. 5 and 6. City Performed in general maintenance activities Complete
Repair and rebuild Pump No. 1 City Pump rebuilt: 5/2019 Motor rebuilt: 5/2019 Complete
Repair and rebuild Pump No. 2 City Pump rebuilt: 7/2020 Motor rebuilt: 10/2020 Complete
Repair and rebuild Pump No. 3 City Pump rebuilt: 5/2019 Motor rebuilt: 5/2019 Complete
Repair and rebuild Pump No. 4 City Pump rebuilt: 5/2019 Complete Repair and rebuild Pump No. 5 City Pump rebuilt: 5/2020 Motor rebuilt: 5/2020 Complete
CHAPTER 2 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022 | 2-11
Category Improvement Item Responsible
Party Status Timing
Shoreline IPS – Pipeline An 8-in diameter segment of polyethylene pipe mounted on a bridge was noted as
“exposed to sunlight” and identified as a
reliability concern.
City Staff to monitor quarterly and
address N/A
Several high-pressure gas line crossings
were identified with potentially limited
coverage, insufficient clearance, and high
risk.
City Staff to monitor quarterly and
address N/A
A prioritized pipe replacement program to
address an increasing number of joint
failures on larger pipes is recommended.
City Staff to consider N/A
Add a pipe looping system to mitigate low
pressure at the dead ends of the
distribution system. The 2014 RWFS study
recommended approx. 5,000-ft of 6-in
piping throughout the distribution system.
City
Some CIP projects have been
designed and approved, but
not yet financed.
Mid-term
Due to high costs and
disturbances.
RWQCP RW – Pump Station Adjust the controls on the large pump startup to more slowly ramp up or down
the speed of the pumps
Palo Alto Staff to consider N/A
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 2 2-12 | MARCH 2022 | FINAL
Category Improvement Item Responsible
Party Status Timing
RWQCP Recycled Water –
Distribution System Adjust customer systems and schedules to control the timing of system and demand City & Palo Alto Customer changes might be
considered if other system-
wide changes produce
insufficient improvements.
Long-term.
To be considered after
system-wide projects
are implemented
Add storage to the Mountain View system
so a more constant pressure can be
maintained in the distribution system.
City
Alternative tank locations
being considered in 2020
RWFS.
Long-term
When system is
expanded, a storage
tank will be needed.
Add a pressure control valve or reservoir to
reduce spikes in pressure in the Mountain
View system.
City Determine location of issue
needed prior to implementing. Long-term
Add a pressure transmitter at the end of
the distribution system to send a signal to
the pump station to start ramping up the
VFD speed before the pressure in the
pump station drops.
Palo Alto Implement if other
adjustments do not work. Long-term
Add connections between the water mains
in North Shoreline Blvd and Amphitheatre
Pkwy and the water mains in Marine Way
and Terminal Blvd to loop the distribution
system. This will not solve the problem at
the far end of the system, but may help the
pressure in the center section, and will
reduce water age.
City
High cost, implement at a later
date if all other alternatives
have been exhausted.
Long-term
Implement if adding
customers makes it
warranted.
Install a geared valve at the RWQCP truck
fill station that will open and close more
slowly to reduce potential for surge events.
Palo Alto
This was installed at the fill
station but ultimately remove d
because it was slowing down
the fill process.
Palo Alto is instead installing a
flowmeter on the fill station
that communicates directly
with the pump station to
proactively respond to the
change in flow.
No longer pursuing.
CHAPTER 3 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022 | 3-1
Chapter 3
PROJECT AL TERNATIVES ANAL YSIS
3.1 Introduction
This chapter builds on the existing recycled water system and users defined in Chapter 2 into four alternatives and four sub alternatives to best expand recycled water use in the City of Mountain View (City or Mountain View) service area. For each alternative analyzed, a description of the alignment, demands served, and major infrastructure required is presented. This chapter also presents infrastructure sizing, cost development and other non -monetary criteria to evaluate and compare the identified alternat ives. These criteria were used to rank the alternatives and identify the one that best meets the City’s goals and objectives. The “ Base Case” alternative is also discussed in this chapter , which presents the City’s existing system primarily serving the North Bayshore area.
3.2 Infrastructure Sizing Assumptions
Elements of the City’s future recycled water system were sized based on the projected max day peak hour scenario flows and sizing criteria defined in this chapter. Sizing criteria were developed for recycled water storage capacity, pipe roughness, maximum velocity, acceptable pressure range, and various peaking factors. A summary of criteria used to size elements of the City’s future recycled water system is presented in Table 3.1 and discussed briefly below. The criteria were developed based on industry standards, experience with similar systems, and existing City data. Several of the criteria listed in Table 3.1 represent conservative planning assumptions. As the commitment of potential customers becomes more certain, these planning and evaluation criteria should be further refined.
3.2.1 System Sizing
The recycled water system conveyance components (i.e., pumping and piping) w as sized to deliver maximum day demand (MDD). For reliability purposes (i.e., in case a pump is out of service), it is desirable to maintain a firm pump station capacity equal to the MDD, minus the capacity of the largest pump. Supply , in excess of MDD , requi r e d f o r p e a k h o ur d e ma n d ( P HD) would be met by operational storage. If, however, there is no operational storage available, then the system must be sized to handle PHDs.
3.2.1.1 Roughness Coefficient
Pipeline roughness coefficients establish the head loss associated with each pipeline segment. Within this hydraulic model, the Hazen -Williams head loss equations were used and roughness coefficients were calibrated as a part of the 2014 Study. Following calibration, roughness coefficients ranged from 110 to 150. New and proposed pipelines in this Study were given roughness coefficients of 120.
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 3 3-2 | MARCH 2022| FINAL
3.2.2 Operational Storage
Operational storage is the amount required to provide the difference in quantity between the customer's peak demands and the system's firm supply capacity. Because the various alternatives assume a nighttime 8 -hour irrigation diurnal pattern, the required operational storage, in million gallons (MG), is then calculated using the following formula:
𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂 𝑆𝑆𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑆𝑆𝑂𝑂 = (𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 − 𝑀𝑀𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃) ∗ (8 ℎ𝑂𝑂𝑜𝑜𝑂𝑂𝑠𝑠) ∗ ( 1 𝑑𝑑𝑂𝑂𝑑𝑑
24 ℎ𝑂𝑂𝑜𝑜𝑂𝑂𝑠𝑠)
Operational storage equalizes diurnal demand fluctuations by providing supply during peak hours when the demands exceed the peak capacity from supply source(s). An approximate 20- percent increase in volume was assumed to account for headspace and dead volum e included in the total storage and offer operational flexibility. The hydraulic model was used to verify the total storage value and ensure proper sizing of the facility to maintain system wide pressure, velocity, and head loss criteria. The total storage size will be used to determine the capital costs for the reservoir.
3.2.3 Peaking Factors
Peaking factors are used to relate the average recycled water demands seen throughout the year to the peak day and peak hourly demand that the recycled water system is evaluated on.
Junctions in the hydraulic model are given average day demands and a diurn al curve associated with the demand type. The hourly peaking factors in table 3.1 correspond to the peak hour associated with these diurnal patterns. An hourly irrigation peaking factor of 3.8 was also used in the 2014 study and is typical of irrigation cu stomers in a recycled water system.
The max day peaking factor for the current study was revised from 2.3 to 3.4 based on historical flow data at the Palo Alto Pump Station. No historical hourly data was available so hourly peaking assumptions were kept co nsistent with the 2014 Study.
Table 3.1 Alternatives Modeling Criteria Summary
Category Criteria
Storage
Operational Storage(1) (PHDmgd-MDDmgd) x (8 hours) x (1 day/24 hours) Pipelines
Maximum Veloc it y 5 fps
Roughness Coefficient 120
Typical Pipeline Sizes 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24 inches
Service Pressure(2)
Minimum Pressure During PHD 40 psi
Maximum Pressure During PHD 90 psi
Maximum Pressure During PHD, (for services
downstream of Shoreline IPS)
110 psi
CHAPTER 3 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022 | 3-3
Category Criteria
Peaking Factors
Maximum Day Peaking Factors
Irrigation 3.4
Cooling 3.0
Indoor 1.0
Industrial 1.8
Hourly Peaking Factors
Irrigation 3.8
Cooling 2.5
Indoor Residential 1.5
Indoor Office 2.4
Notes:
(1) This criterion is used to approximate the storage requirement of various alternatives assuming a nighttime 8-hour irrigation diurnal pattern and that the impacts of non-irrigation demands (i.e., cooling, indoor) on peak nighttime flows are negligible. (2) As will be discussed later, infrastructure requirements for alternatives developed in this chapter were estimated conceptually; hydraulic sizing of the recommended alternative to provide minimum service pressures is provided in Chapter 4. (3) Abbreviations: fps = feet per second; psi = pounds per square inch.
3.3 Description of Alternatives
Four alternatives and four sub-alternatives were developed for initial evaluation based on the expected future demands of the City’s service area. Demands for the sites were provided by the City. The average day demand, maximum day demand, and peak hour demand served by each alternative are summarized by category and presented in Table 3.2 Furthermore, each alternative is broken down into sub -use categories to show the specific demand needs. Figure 3.1 gives an overview of how all f our alternative alignments and sub-alternative alignments relate to one another.
As discussed in Chapter 2, the City has a current agreement with the City of Palo Alto to receive a peak flow rate of up to 3 million gallons per day ( mgd). An agreement enacted in 2019 entitles Mountain View to 2.5 mg d of enhanced recycled water from the new Advanced Water Purification System (AWPS). A quantitative comparison of the demands, infrastructure needs, and customers served for each of the four alternatives is presented in Table 3.2. Note that the linear footage to reach tank and booster pump site locations is not included. The preferred alternatives are shaded in yellow. The peak hour demands are expected to occur from 2AM to 6AM, when all demand types except indoor office are being served. Therefore, the storage demand was sized for the irrigation, cooling, and indoor residential peak hour demand, and not indoor office.
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 3 3-4 | MARCH 2022| DRAFT
Table 3.2 Quantitative Comparison of Alternatives
Alternative Sub-Use
Category
Total
Customers
Linear Feet of
Pipe (ft)
Sub-Alt
Demands
(mgd)
Average Day
Demand
(mgd)
Max. Day
Demand
(mgd)(4)
Peak Hour
Demand
(mgd)(2)
Approx.
Operational
Storage
(MG)(6)
Approx.
Additional
Supply
(mgd)(3)
0 – Base Case
(Existing
System)
North
Bayshore 52 -
0.34 0.46 1.2 4.4 1.1 0
Shoreline 0.12
1 – Alt. 0 +
new North
Bayshore
users + NASA
demands
New North
Bayshore
133 12,900
0.56 1.45 3.7 8.5 1.6 0.7 New
Shoreline 0.15
NASA
Demands 0.28
2 – Alt. 1 +
NASA
pipeline
expansion +
East Whisman
New East
Whisman
Demands 226 30,200
0.85 2.30 6.2 15.8 3.2 3.2
Demands
Along Route -
3 – Alt. 1 +
East Whisman
(via
Middlefield
Road)
New East
Whisman
Demands 257 37,000
0.85 2.39 6.4 16.9 3.5 3.4
Demands
Along Route 0.08
4 – Alt 1. +
East Whisman
(via Central
Expressway)
New East
Whisman
Demands 358 44,100
0.85 2.40 6.5 17.1 3.5 3.5
Demands
Along Route 0.10
CHAPTER 3 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW DRAFT | MARCH 2022 | 3-5
Alternative Sub-Use
Category
Total
Customers
Linear Feet of
Pipe (ft)
Sub-Alt
Demands
(mgd)
Average Day
Demand
(mgd)
Max. Day
Demand
(mgd)(4)
Peak Hour
Demand
(mgd)(2)
Approx.
Operational
Storage
(MG)(6)
Approx.
Additional
Supply
(mgd)(3)
Sub-
Alternatives
5a(5) – Dual
plumbed
expansion to
Castro
N/A
5 dual
plumbed and
71 customers
along route
4,000 N/A 0.05 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.1
5b (5) – Dual
plumbed
expansion to
San Antonio
Center
N/A
6 dual
plumbed and
179 customers
along route
11,400 N/A 0.14 0.4 1.5 0.5 0.6
5c (5) – Dual
plumbed
expansion to
St. Francis
High School
N/A
6 dual
plumbed and
247 customers
along route
10,200 N/A 0.13 0.4 1.5 0.5 0.5
5d (5) – Dual
plumbed
expansion to
San Antonio
Center
N/A
1 dual
plumbed and
14 customers
along route
9,600 N/A 0.03 0.1 1 0.3 0.3
Notes:
(1) Abbreviations: MG = million gallons; mgd = million gallons per day. (2) Peak hour demands are based on irrigation, cooling, and indoor residential types. Indoor office demands peak later in the day. (3) Additional supply is based on the 3 mgd peak supply flow rate. So additional supply would be the difference between 3 mgd and the Alternatives max day demand. (4) Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 4 have max daily demands higher than the pump station can meet with i t s f i r m c ap ac i t y ( 2 l ar g e p u m p i n s e r vi c e an d 1 o u t o f s e r vi c e o r i n s t an d b y) . (5) Sub Alts 5a, 5b, 5c, and 5d are additional flow to Alternative 4’s routing option. Sub Alts 5a, 5b, 5c, and 5d are all independent from each other and need expansion to East Whisman via Alt 2, 3, or 4.
(6) Total storage is assumed to be 20% larger than operational storage.
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 3 3-6 | MARCH 2022| DRAFT
-This Page Intentionally Left Blank -
UT"=)
UT"=)UT"=)
UT"=)
UTUTUT"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)
Jogel
Slough
Shoreline
Lake
HUFF
AVE
PKWY
UT"=)
UT"=)
UT"=)
CALIFORNIA ST
CASTRO ST
SAN ANTONIO RD
MOFFETT BLVD
KÍ
KÍ
Shoreline Ponds
Meter
ALTA
AVE
MARINE WAY
STIERLIN CT
CRITTENDEN LN
SPACE PARK WAY
SHORELINE BLVD
CHARLESTON RD
SHOREBIRD WAY
GARCIA AVE
PEAR AVE
MACON AVE
AMPHITHEATRE
Irrigation PS
Supply from
RW, Ponds,
or Potable
INDEPENDENCE AVE
RENGSTORFF AVE
OLD MIDDLEFIELD WAY
W MIDDLEFIELD RD
?¾
LOGUE AVE
?Ë
CENTRAL EXPY
MOFFETT BLVD
CENTRAL EXPY
Disclaimer: Features shown in this
figure are for planning purposes and
represent approximate locations.
Engineering and/or survey accuracy
is not implied.
Data Sources: City of Mountain View,
ESRI
O
0 0.60.3
Miles
Last Revised: March 04, 2022 pw://IO-PW-INT.Carollo.local:Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Mountain&space;View/9010C00/Data/GIS/Figure 3.1 Figure 3.1 Alternative Overview
Future Tank: Option 2
Charleston Park (South)
Future Tank: Option 3
South NASA Area
Optional Looping
Legend
"=) Pump Station
UT Existing Tank
Possible Future Tank & Pump
Station
Existing Pipeline
North Bayshore Future Pipes
East Whisman Future Pipes
Central Expwy Routing
to East Whisman
Future Middlefield Routing
to East Whisman
Expansion Areas
City Boundary
Proposed NASA Routing to East
Whisman
Dual Plumbed Expansion Scenario 5D
(San Antonio Precise Plan Area via San Antonio Rd)
Dual Plumbed Expansion Scenario 5B
(San Antonio Precise Plan Area via California St)
Dual Plumbed Expansion Scenario 5C (Miramonte Ave)
Dual Plumbed Expansion Scenario 5A (Downtown)
Future Dual Plumbed Expansion
Future Tank: Option 1
Charleston Park (North)
Alternative 4:
Central Expwy Routing
to East Whisman
Alternative 3:
Middlefield Routing
to East whisman
Future Tank: Option 4
Terminus Blvd
Future Tank: Option 5
Joaquin
Future Tank: Option 6
Neighborhood park in the
East Whisman Precise Plan
UT"=)
Possible Future Tank & Pump
Station (not on City Property)
UT"=)
CHAPTER 3 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 3 3-8 | MARCH 2022| DRAFT
-This Page Intentionally Left Blank -
CHAPTER 3 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022 | 3-9
3.3.1 Alternatives 0 and 1
Alternative 0 is considered as the base case and serves the existing recycled water users in the North Bayshore. Existing customers were determined from the “9060” account prefix. The pond demands at the Shoreline Golf Links were not considered for the peaking analysis in the model, but are included as existing customers in Appendix F . One dual plumbed user exists in this scenario. For a peak day and peak hour condition in the model, the existing system is already showing a need for additional storage, as shown in Table 3.2.
Alternative 1 serves the existing recycled water users along with additional users in the North Bayshore area as defined above in Table 3.2 and identified by the City. Additional users and flows for this alternative were based on potable water irrigation customers and areas of the system where demands have decreased since the 2014 study. Additional customers at dual plumbed sites, Stierlin Court, and Charleston East were manually added based on feedback from the City .
In addition, Alternative 1 serves demands at the NASA airfield via one single master meter. The master meter installation will quantify the recycled water uses on the NASA site. The NASA demands were developed by a separate firm and provided to Carollo as a part of the 2014 Study.
The total demand of Alternative 1’s North Bayshore demands was scaled to be consistent with the 1.17 mgd determined in the City’s Precise Plan.
Additional storage and a 215 hp booster pump station is recommended to serve the future growth of the system and maintai n pressures within criteria. This alignment would mainly consist of connections between existing recycled water pipelines or extensions throughout the North Bayshore. All infrastructure sizing is dependent on the finalized number and demand of customers for each alternative.
3.3.2 Alternatives 2, 3, and 4
Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 include the users and piping identified in Alternative 1 and extends recycled water piping into the East Whisman area. Future East Whisman demand methodology was based on the East Whisman Precise Plan with 50 percent of total use assumed for irrigation and 25 percent as indoor recycled use for high intensity office and industrial dual plumbed buildings.. These demands were allocated to all parcels in the East Whisman area and are summarized in Table 3.2.
Additional recycled water supply is needed for any expansion to East Whisman, or Alternatives 2, 3, or 4. At such time, an additional study to finalize pipeline and tank sizing in the East Whisman area is recommended. 550 hp of pumping is needed to expand the system into East Whisman , for Alternative 2, 3, or 4 . Note that the exact horsepower of pumping will vary depending on the location of tanks determined in the tank siting study. The City should plan for a pump station attached to each tank and a booster pump station along the Middlefield routing for Alternative 2, 3, or 4.
Alternative 2 includes the users and piping identified in Alternative 1 and ext ends recycled water piping through the NASA site into the East Whisman area. This Alternative would convey flow via NASA’s existing 18-inch RT Jones line. Alternative 2 would require the least amount of new piping but conveying all East Whisman’s projected peak flows through the size of the existing lines is a concern . This causes high modeled velocities and head losses outside of the City’s criteria, and some upsizing would be needed near the tank .
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 3 3-10 | MARCH 2022| FINAL
Alternative 3 includes the users and piping identified in Alternative 1 and extends recycled water piping to East Whisman via Middlefield Road. This Alternative would serve the same customers as Alternative 2 and add 0.08 mgd of service to parcel frontages along the Middlefield Road routing option. The supply along this routing is approximate and based on irrigable land use assumptions consistent with the East Whisman WSA. The routing to East Whisman would be entirely new pipe. To meet velocity performance criteria , a large new transmission pipeline along Middlefield would be needed, assuming a tank in the North Bayshore and a tank in East Whisman. This pipeline would need to be sized as an 18-inch assuming the North Charleston Park tank location.
Alternative 4 includes the users and piping identified in Alternative 1 and extends recycled water piping to East Whisman via Central Expressway. This Alternative would serve the same customers as Alternative 2 and add 0.10 mgd of service to parcel frontages along Central Expressway. Similar to Alternative 3, the routing would be entirely new pipe . To meet velocity performance criteria, a large new transmission pipeline along Central Expressway would be needed. Additional piping would be required to route the pipeline along Central Expressway compared to Middlefield Road (Alternative 3).
Alternative 3 provides the most cost -effective path to extend the system to East Whisman, while still remaining in optimal performance criteria.
3.3.3 Sub-alternatives – Dual Plumbed Expansion Options Four sub-alternatives were developed to expand the recycled water piping to an area outside of the main commercial areas of the City (North Bayshore and East Whisman) to a future, large dual plumbed demand. The four proposed sub-alternatives would need either Alternative 2, 3, or 4 to be completed in conjunction with, or prior to, these dual plumbed expansions. The storage and demands presented assume Alternative 4 would be completed prior to these sub - alternatives, as the Middlefield routing is the closest to these. Alternativ e 3 would require approximately 2,200 additional linear feet of piping. These were developed in consideration with the citywide dual plumbing ordinance, previously discussed in Chapter 2. Sub-alternatives 5b and 5d discussed below are different routing options to the same customer.
3.3.3.1 Sub-alternative 5a – Dual Plumbed Expansion to Castro Street Sub-alternative 5a would extend recycled water piping west on Castro Street and includes 4,000 feet of additional piping. No booster pumping is anticipated. A small amount of a dditional storage of 0.1 MG is anticipated at this time. Additional a nalysis should occur prior to the expansion to refine the demands anticipated along the route. This option would serve the five additional dual plumbed sites in the commercial area of Castro Street (sub-alt 5a), within the City’s service area.
3.3.3.2 Sub-alternative 5b – Dual Plumbed Expansion to San Antonio Center along California St Sub-alternative 5b would extend recycled water piping west on a portion of Castro Street and north on California Street and includes 11,700 feet of additional piping. No booster pumping is anticipated. A small amount of additional storage of 0.5 MG is anticipated at this time.
Additional analysis should occur prior to the expansion to refine the demands anticipated along the route. This option would serve the additional dual plumbed sites of sub-alt 5a in the commercial area of Castro Street as well as one dual plumbed site at the San Antonio Center, an outdoor shopping mall within the City’s service area.
CHAPTER 3 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022 | 3-11
3.3.3.3 Sub-alternative 5c – Dual Plumbed Expansion to St. Francis High School Sub-alternative 5 c would extend recycled water piping west on Castro Street and would include 10,200 feet of additional piping to alternative 5a. A small amount of additional storage of 0.5 MG is anticipated at this time. Additional analysis should occur prior to the expansion to refine the demands anticipated along the route. A small booster pumping station is likely needed to implement this sub-alternative, due to elevation increases. This option would serve the additional dual plumbed sites of sub-alt 5a in the commercial area of Castro Street as well as St.
Francis High School, located further southwest on Castro Street.
3.3.3.4 Sub-alternative 5d – Dual Plumbed Expansion to San Antonio Center al ong San Antonio Rd
Sub-alternative 5bd would extend recycled water piping southbound on San Antonio Rd and includes 9,600 feet of additional piping. No booster pumping is anticipated. A small amount of additional storage of 0.3 MG is anticipated at this time. Additional analysis should occur prior to the expansion to refine the demands anticipated along the route . This option would serve additional dual plumbed sites in the San Antonio Center, an outdoor shopping mall within the City’s service area.
3.4 Tank Siting Options
All alternatives are recommended to include storage to maintain adequate system pressures.
Estimated storage needs are outlined in Table 3.2. Figure 3.1 shows the locations for a buried concrete storage tank that were considered, Table 3.3 outlines and compares these alternatives to each other. Note that a combination of tanks can be used with centralized storage in both North Bayshore and East Whisman. Tank sites at the North NASA area and San Veron Park were initially considered and modeled but were later deemed infeasible based on preliminary analysis and feedback from the City. Prior to construction of a tank, a tank siting study is recommended to re-evaluate storage options and determine the best location.
Table 3.3 Tank Siting Options
Tank Option No. Location Advantages Disadvantages
Associated
Alternative
Served
1 Charleston Park
(North)
City park
property
Centralized to
North Bayshore
demands
1, 2, 3, or 4
2 Charleston Park
(South)
City park
property
Centralized to
North Bayshore
demands
1, 2, 3, or 4
3 South NASA area Lower hp pump
required
NASA property,
not in North
Bayhsore
Not centralized
to demands
1, 2
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 3 3-12 | MARCH 2022| FINAL
Tank Option No. Location Advantages Disadvantages
Associated
Alternative
Served
4 Terminus
Boulevard On City property
Not centralized
to North
Bayshore
demands
1, 2, 3, or 4
5 Joaquin
Centralized to
North Bayshore
demands
Not on City
property 1, 2, 3, or 4
6 Neighborhood
park in the East
Whisman Precise
Plan
Centralized to
East Whisman
demands
Not on City
property 2, 3, or 4
3.5 Basis of Costs
The following basis of costs were used to develop planning level cost estimates and were based on past project work within the City. Tables 3.4, 3.5, and 3.6 detail the information used to develop pipeline, pump station, and storage tank costs , respectively.
Table 3.4 PVC Pipeline Unit Cost Assumptions
Pipeline Diameter (in.) Unit Costs Capital Cost ($/LF)(1) 6 $231 $375
8 $262 $425
10 $292 $475
12 $323 $525
14 $354 $575
16 $385 $625
20 $415 $675
24 $446 $725
Notes:
(1) Pipeline capital costs provided by the City in February 2022. (2) Unit costs estimated from capital markup of 1.625%
Table 3.5 Booster Pump Station Unit Cost Assumptions
Station Size (hp) Unit Construction Cost ($/hp)(1) Capital Cost ($/hp)(2) 100 hp and smaller $12,950 $21,500
100-500 hp $7,775 $13,000
600-1,000 hp $6,475 $11,000
1,000 hp and larger $5,175 $9,000
Notes:
(1) ENR Cost Index for February 2020 is 12043
(2) Capital Markup of 1.625%
CHAPTER 3 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022 | 3-13
Table 3.6 Storage Tank Unit Cost Assumptions
Type
(MG)
Unit Construction Cost
($/gallon)(1) Capital Cost ($/gallon)(2) Factor of Increase for Buried Tank
<1 $2.75 $4.75 2.5
1 to 3 $2.25 $3.75 2.5
3 to 5 $2.00 $3.50 2.5
5 to 10 $1.75 $3.00 2.5
Notes:
(3) ENR Cost Index for February 2020 is 12043
(4) Capital Markup of 1.625%
3.6 Alternatives Cost Comparison
Planning level cost estimates were prepared based on the unit construction costs for each of the four alternatives. The pipelines, tanks, and pump stations were further ref ined, but the cost comparison is still relevant for selecting a preferred alternative. Table 3.7 presents preliminary estimates of capital costs for four alignment alternatives described earlier in this chapter. A life cycle cost comparison was also developed to compare the alternatives on a long -term basis. The cost comparison considered capital and operations and maintenance (O& M) costs for a project term of 30 years and a debt rate of 3 percent to determine the alternatives unit costs in dollars per acre-foot (AF). Costs for storage tanks, booster pumping, and pipelines were developed based on the cost assumptions shown in Tables 3.4, 3.5, and 3.6. Table 3.8 presents life cycle and unit costs of the alignment alternatives. Alternatives 1, 3, and 5a are the most cost-effective alternatives for expansion to different areas.
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 3 3-14 | MARCH 2022| FINAL
Table 3.7 Estimate of Capital Costs of Project Alternatives Cost Element
Alternative Cost ($ Million)
1 2 3 4 5a(2) 5b(2) 5c 5d(2)
Pipeline
Capital Cost(1) $6.8 $15.9 $19.4 $23.2 $2.1 $6.1 $5.4 $5.0 Storage Tank
Capital Cost $17.8 $18.3 $21.3 $21.8 $1.2 $5.3 $5.3 $0.6 Booster
Station Capita l
Cost
$2.8 $7.2 $7.2 $7.2 $0.0 $0.0 $1.0 $0.0
Total Capital
Cost for
Single
Alternative
$27.4 $41.3 $47.8 $52.1 $3.3 $11.5 $11.6 $5.7
Total Capital
Cost for
Alternative
Plus
Necessary
Sub-Sequent
Alternatives(6)
$27.4 $68.6 $75.2 $79.5 $78.5 $86.6 $86.8 $80.9
Notes:
(1) For the purposes of alternative comparisons presented in this chapter, the pipeline construction costs were developed based on the estimated lengths presented in Table 3.2 and assumed an average pipe diameter of 12-inch for all the alternatives.
(2) These alternatives add no cost associated with booster pump station construction. (3) Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 would be built in addition to Alternative 1. (4) Alternatives 5a and 5d would be built in addition to Alternative 1 and one of Alternative 2, 3, or 4. (5) Alternatives 5b and 5c would be built in addition to Alternative 3. (6) Cost Assumes Alternative 3 is selected.
CHAPTER 3 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022 | 3-15
Table 3.8 Estimate of Unit Costs of Project Alternatives Cost
Element(1)
Alternative Costs
1 2 3 4 5a 5b 5b 5d
Estimated
Capital Cost
($M)
$27.4 $41.3 $47.8 $52.1 $3.3 $11.5 $11.6 $5.7
Annualized
Unit Cost
($M/year)(2)
$1.8 $2.7 $3.1 $3.4 $0.2 $0.7 $0.8 $0.4
Annual
O&M Cost
($M/year)(3)
$0.5 $0.8 $1.0 $1.0 $0.1 $0.2 $0.2 $0.1
Total
Annual
Costs
$2.3 $3.5 $4.1 $4.4 $0.3 $1.0 $1.0 $0.5
Average
Annual
Demand
(AFY)(5)
1,625 953 1,054 1,065 55 152 146 23
Project
Unit Cost
($/AF)
$1,432 $3,685 $3,861 $4,165 $5,040 $6,406 $6,774 $20,751 Notes:
(1) Costs provided are for comparative consideration only and do not include markups (i.e. contingency, engineering, construction, environmental, or legal costs).
(2) Based on a 3 percent annual interest rate and a payback period of 30 years. (3) Based on 2 percent of total capital cost.
(4) Abbreviations: AF = acre-foot; AFY = acre-foot per year. (5) Demands represent additive demands of expansion option.
3.7 Alternatives Evaluation
Five evaluation criteria were considered for the qualitative comparison of these alternatives and one quantitative. These include the following:
• Energy Use : Considers pumping of recycled water from the Regional Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP) to the proposed storage site and from the storage tank to the proposed users.
• Environmental Impact: Considers alignment factors relative to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements such as traffic, utilities, and construction activity duration.
• Ease of Implementation: Considers implementation issues identified by the City.
Includes acquiring easements and construction difficulty on busy roads. • Agency Coordination: Considers the number of agencies needed to implement the given alternative.
• Potable Water Offset : Considers the amount of potable water offset needed to meet the alternatives supply.
Cost Impacts: Considers the relative unit capital cost comparisons between alternatives presented in Section 3.6.Each alternative is scored on a scale of 1 to 3 with respect to each CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 3 3-16 | MARCH 2022| FINAL
criterion. A low score for a particular criterion and alternative in dicates that the criterion has a negative impact on the alternative and vice versa. Once the impact of all criteria on an alternative was identified, the aggregate score was calculated and compared with the other alternatives. Table 3.9 presents the scores and overall ranking for each alternative.
The following explains the reasoning behind each alternatives ra nking:
• Alternative 1:
- Energy Use (3): Alternative has the smallest demands and therefore will require the least pumping.
- Environmental Imp act (3): Similar environmental impacts are expected for all Alternatives.
- Ease of Implementation (3): Alternative would require the least new construction and thereby difficulty with implementing projects.
- Agency Coordination (3): Limited to no coordination is needed for this alternative. - Potable Water Offset (1): Least volume of potable water offset supplied. - Cost Impacts (3): This is the cheapest and most cost -effective alternative. • Alternative 2:
- Energy Use (2): Would require additional pumping to suppl y East Whisman customers. Similar pumping needs for Alternatives 3 and 4. - Environmental Impact (2): Least number of environmental impacts compared to the other alternatives.
- Ease of Implementation ( 1): Alternative would require significant new piping, and street is not owned by the City.
- Agency Coordination (1): Transmission pipeline is entirely through NASA property.
This alternative would require coordination between the City, CALTRANS, and NASA.
- Potable Water Offset (2): Some potable water offset would be provided. - Cost Impacts (2): This alternative costs more than 1, and similar to 3 and 4. • Alternative 3:
- Energy Use (2): Would require additional pumping to supply East Whisman customers. Similar pumping needs for Alternatives 2 and 4. - Environmental Impact (2): Similar pipe length installation as Alternative 2. Higher traffic impacts compared to Alternative 1.
- Ease of Implementation (2): Alternative would require significant new piping, but street is City owned.
- Agency Coordination (2): Routing is along City owned land , except for Highway 85 and 101 crossings. Some coordination between the City, CALTRANS, and NASA would be required
- Potable Water Offset ( 3): Offers the largest amount of potable water offset in East Whisman and along Middlefield Avenue.
- Cost Impacts (2): This alternative costs more than 1, and similar to 2 and 4. • Alternative 4:
- Energy Use (2): Would require additional pumping to supply East Whisman customers. Similar pumping needs for Alternatives 2 and 3. - Environmental Impact (1): Highest traffic impact of all alternatives. Longest length of pipe installation.
CHAPTER 3 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022 | 3-17
- Ease of Implementation (1): Alternative would require significant new piping, with portions of the street owned by the City and Santa Clara County Roads and Airport. - Agency Coordination (1): Routing is primarily along Central Expressway, which is not City owned. Significant coordination between the City, CALTRANS, and NASA would be required.
- Potable Water Offset ( 3): Offers the largest amount of potable water offset in East Whisman and along the route.
- Cost Impacts (2): This alternative costs more than 1, and similar to 2 and 3.
Table 3.9 Qualitative Comparison of Alternatives
Alternative
Energy Use
Environmental
Impact
Ease of
Implementation
Agency
Coordination
Potable Water
Offset
Costs
Overall Ranking
1 – Alt. 0 + new North
Bayshore users + NASA
demands
3 3 3 3 1 3 2.7
2 – Alt. 1 + NASA pipeline
expansion + East Whisman 2 2 1 1 2 2 1.7
3 – Alt. 1 + East Whisman
(via Middlefield Rd.) 2 2 2 2 3 2 2.2
4 – Alt 1. + East Whisman
(via Central Expwy.) 2 1 1 1 3 2 1.7
Legend:
3 – Most Desirable
2 – Neutral
1 – Least Desirable
Overall Ranking Score: Lowest number is the worst / least desirable.
3.8 Preliminary Recommended Alternative
It should be noted that Alternatives 1 through 4 require additional water supply that exceeds the current contracted amount of 3 mgd. It is possible that additional storage and/or recycled water supply could help the City to provide service to the East Whisman area, dual plumbed locations, and other areas of the City.
For the near future, it was deemed most suitable to focus on Alternat ive 1 as the recommended alternative to serve additional users in the North Bayshore area to optimize the current recycled water allocation. Due to the uncertainty of the timing for additional recycled water supply , adding a tank in the North Bayshore area should be prioritized. It is recommended to build a tank and booster pump station at or near location 1, Charleston Park (North). Additional information on the recommended tank is provided in Chapter 4. A tank siting study is recommended before the City finalizes a tank location.
A complete list of users served by this alternative and their estimated demands is presented in Appendix F.
Chapter 4 focuses on detailed development of Alternative 1 for the City’s near -term expansion project and discusses future expansion to serve future dual plumbed sites and the East Whisman commercial area via Middlefield Road ( Alternative 3).
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 3 3-18 | MARCH 2022| FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left Blank -
CHAPTER 4 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022 | 4-1
Chapter 4
RECOMMENDED PROJECT, FUNDING &
FINANCING
4.1 Introduction
In Chapter 3, the City of Mountain View (City or Mountain View) identified a preferred near -term and future alternative. The near-term alternative (Alternative 1) includes serving the existing recycled water customers as well as 82 unique additional users in the North Bayshore area. The additional customers are comprised of both seasonal irrigation users as well as year -round dual plumbed uses.
Due to current recycled water availability limitations, future expansion beyond the North Bayshore area was not considered at this time. Should additional water become available to the City, additional customers could be served in the future in the East Whisman area by Alternative 3 (expansion via Middlefield Road), along with NASA, and additional dual plumbed uses throughout the City.
This chapter describes the detailed analysis of the near-term and future expansion including customers served, recommended facilities, and required piping. The funding and financing analysis presented later in this chapter is provided for the Alternative 1 expansion only.
4.2 Model Update and Development
The City’s recycled water hydraulic model was developed and calibrated as a part of the 2014 Recycled Water Feasibility Study (RWFS). This project updated the model further and entailed a software conversion from H2OMap Water to InfoWater Pro. Demands for all customers were allocated based on max billing demands from 2014 and 2017 -2020. Shoreline Park was not assigned any max day or peak hour demand to its base average flow . Billing records were spatially joined to the nearest model junction as average daily demands. The average max imum day peaking factor recorded at the Palo Alto Pump Station was 3.4 . This was input in the model and results were run for a 72 -hour max day period, with diurnal patterns applied as defined in the 2014 RWFS. Modelling criteria for this recommended project remained the same as the criteria presented in Chapter 3 (Table 3.1).
4.2.1 Infrastructure Sizing and Performance Criteria
The hydraulic model was used to create scenarios for all alternatives and refine infrastructure sizing for Alternative 1 and Alternative 3. The model was run so that pipelines did not exceed City criteria, presented in Chapter 3, of velocities of 5 fps and junctions with pressures above 40 pounds per square inch ( psi) during Peak Hour Demand conditions and above 65 psi during normal operating conditions . The model also assumed a constant supply of 3,000 gallons per minute (gpm) for Alternative 1 and 6,000 gpm for Alternative 3 would be obtained and supplied at the Palo Alto Pump Station. With two pumps running providing a total of 4,000 gpm, CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 4 4-2 | MARCH 2022 | FIN AL
Palo Alto cannot meet a 6,000 gpm demand while keeping the 3 rd pump in standby.
Improvements to the supply would be n eeded prior to expanding towards East Whisman and Alternative 3.
Tanks, pump stations, and pipelines were sized based on meeting these criteria. Figure 4.1 shows the preferred North Bayshore expansion (Alternative 1) and future expansion to East Whisman (Alternative 3) with a tank in the North Bayshore area and a booster pump station along the Middlefield route. Figure 4.2 shows the existing pipelines with elevated velocities and pressures below 40 psi. These are recommended to be upsized to meet performan ce criteria in the North Bayshore area. There is approximately a 50-foot elevation increase between North Bayshore and East Whisman requiring a booster pump station along the Middlefield rout e option. The primary feasible City-owned land for locating the booster pump station at this time is San Veron Park. However, model junctions just north of th is pump station location dip below criteria even after th e pump station is added to the model. Since pressures stay above 30 psi and there are only minor demands along the rout e, this appears to be an adequate location for the pump station. If the system is expanded into East Whisman a final site analysis on the booster pump station is recommended.
The preferred alternative modeled booster pump stations at the proposed North Bayshore Tank and along the Middlefield route. The station in North Bayshore helps stabilize pressures in the near term. The booster station along the Middlefield route is necessary to reach the high elevations in East Whisman. There is flexibility for the booster pump station location. Adding a booster station along with a tank at the Google Middlefield Master Plan area could be considered as a part of the future recommended Tank Site Study.
UT"=)
UTUTUT"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)
Jogel
Slough
Shoreline
Lake
PKWY
UT"=)
UT"=)
CALIFORNIA ST
CASTRO ST
SAN ANTONIO RD
MOFFETT BLVD
UT"=)
KÍ
KÍ
Shoreline Ponds
Meter
MARINE WAY
STIERLIN CT
CRITTENDEN LN
SPACE PARK WAY
SHORELINE BLVD
CHARLESTON RD
SHOREBIRD WAY
GARCIA AVE
PEAR AVE
MACON AVE
AMPHITHEATRE
Irrigation PS
Supply from
RW, Ponds,
or Potable
INDEPENDENCE AVE
RENGSTORFF AVE
OLD MIDDLEFIELD WAY
W MIDDLEFIELD RD
?¾
LOGUE AVE
?Ë
CENTRAL EXPY
MOFFETT BLVD
CENTRAL EXPY
18''
6''
12''
6''
12''
8''
6''
6''
16''
12''
6''
6''
6''
6''
6''
12''
12''
8''
6''
6''
18''
3''
18''
10''10''
12''
8''
12''
6''
12''
6''
8''
12''
12'' 6''
12''
14''
12''
6''
18''
18''
12''
8''
8''
10''
12''
12''
6''
16''
8''
6''
Disclaimer: Features shown in this
figure are for planning purposes and
represent approximate locations.
Engineering and/or survey accuracy
is not implied.
Data Sources: City of Mountain View,
ESRI
O
0 0.60.3
Miles
Last Revised: March 04, 2022 pw://IO-PW-INT.Carollo.local:Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Mountain&space;View/9010C00/Data/GIS/Figure 4.1 Figure 4.1 Preferred Alternative
Legend
"=) Pump Station
UT Existing Tank
North Bayshore Tank Options
Existing Pipeline
North Bayshore Future Pipes
East Whisman Future Pipes
Future Middlefield Routing
to East Whisman
Expansion Areas
City Boundary
Booster Pump
is required along
Middlefield Routing
UT"=)
East Whisman Tank OptionUT"=)
T erminal BLVD Option
Charleston Park (North) Option
Note:The preferred North Bayshore tank
site was selected as North Charleston
Park for the modeling and costs
presented in Chapter 4. However a tank
siting study is recommended to consider
tank locations at Terminus Boulevard
and Joaquin
Joaquin Option
Neighborhood park in the
East Whisman Precise Plan Option
CHAPTER 4 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 4 4-4 | MARCH 2022 | FIN AL
-This Page Intentionally Left Blank -
UT"=)
UTUTUT"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)
Jogel
Slough
Shoreline
Lake
HUFF
AVE
PKWY
UT"=)
UT"=)
UT"=)
CALIFORNIA ST
SAN ANTONIO RD
MOFFETT BLVD
KÍ
KÍ
Shoreline Ponds
Meter
ALTA
AVE
MARINE WAY
STIERLIN CT
CRITTENDEN LN
SPACE PARK WAY
SHORELINE BLVD
CHARLESTON RD
SHOREBIRD WAY
GARCIA AVE
PEAR AVE
MACON AVE
AMPHITHEATRE
Irrigation PS
Supply from
RW, Ponds,
or Potable
INDEPENDENCE AVE
RENGSTORFF AVE
OLD MIDDLEFIELD WAY
W MIDDLEFIELD RD
?¾
LOGUE AVE
?Ë
CENTRAL EXPY
MOFFETT BLVD
CENTRAL EXPY
Disclaimer: Features shown in this
figure are for planning purposes and
represent approximate locations.
Engineering and/or survey accuracy
is not implied.
Data Sources: City of Mountain View,
ESRI
O
0 0 . 5 0 . 2 5
M i l e s
Last Revised: March 04, 2022 pw://IO-PW-INT.Carollo.local:Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Mountain&space;View/9010C00/Data/GIS/Figure 4.2 F i g u r e 4 . 2 P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e P e r f o r m a n c e C r i t e r i a Legend
"=) P u m p S t a t i o n
UT E x i s t i n g T a n k
F u t u r e T a n k O p t i o n s
M a x V e l o c i t y B e l o w 5 f t / s M a x V e l o c i t y A b o v e 5 f t / s E x p a n s i o n A r e a s
C i t y B o u n d a r y
UT"=)
T erminal BLVD Option
Charleston Park (North) Option
Joaquin Option
M i n i m u m P r e s s u r e s
L e s s t h a n 4 0 p s i
Neighborhood park in the
East Whisman Precise Plan Option
Booster Pump
is required along
Middlefield Routing
Note:The preferred North Bayshore tank
site was selected as North Charleston
Park for the modeling and costs
presented in Chapter 4. However a tank
siting study is recommended to consider
tank locations at Terminus Boulevard
and Joaquin
CHAPTER 4 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 4 4-6 | MARCH 2022 | FIN AL
-This Page Intentionally Left Blank -
CHAPTER 4 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022 | 4-7
4.3 Recommended Project
The recommended project consists of near-term expansion throughout the North Bayshore area and a future expansion, via Middlefield Road, to serve the East Whisman area. As previously discussed, due to current recycled water production ability , expansion to the East Whisman area and others is not feasible at this time. Once additional recycled water supply is achieved, expansion to East Whisman via Alterative 3 is recommended . Tables 4.1 and 4.2 detail the demands and recommended facilities for the near- term and future expansions.
Alternative 1 would serve 133 unique addresses, and 81 additional to Alt 0 . The current existing max day demand is 1.2 million gallons per day ( mgd). Expansion to include Alternative 1 would increase the max day demand to 4.2 mgd. Approximately 70 percent of the way through adding all customers in Alternative 1, a 3 mgd max day demand would be reached meaning a need for additional recycled water supply. Hydraulic modeling and City feedback have shown low pressures in the existing system, indicating a current need for a tank. As North Bayshore fully develops the need for a tank will be amplified. A 1.9 MG tank with 1.6 MG of operational storage is recommended in the near-term to facilitate remaining growth in North Bayshore as a part of Alternative 1.
A detailed list of customers is shown in Appendix F and can also be seen in Figure 4.3. The customers for Alternative 1, in the North Bayshore area, are shown in Figure 4.4.
Alternative 3’s expansion would serve 1 24 additional customers in and along the route to East Whisman. To serve all East Whisman a second recycled water tank is recommended.
A tank siting study is recommended to determine the best choice for storage both in North Bayshore and East Whisman. The costs and modeling presented in the rest of this Chapter assume Alternative 1 is enacted with a 1.9 MG tank accompanied with a 215 hp booster pump station in Charleston Park.
Henceforth Alternative 5 will refer to the combination of sub -alts 5a, 5b, and 5c, which are all recommended. These alternatives are all very long term and should not be considered until additional supply is procured, and the system is expanded to East Whi sman. It is recommended that following Alternative 3, the City prioritize expansion to Alternative 5a. Alternative 5a is the most cost effective and offers a logical pathway to proceed 5b and 5c due to its proximity to East Whisman. Alternative 5b is deemed more cost effective than 5d. Primarily due to 5b’s ability to serve parcel frontages along the route, while Alternative 5d’s pipeline is outside of City limits, so the number of parcel frontages along the route is smaller .
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 4 4-8 | MARCH 2022 | FIN AL
Table 4.1 Summary of Average Annual Demands (AFY)
Irrigation
Demands
Indoor
Residential
Demands
Cooling/
Industrial
Demands
Indoor Office
Demands
Shoreline
Demands Total Demand
Total
Cumulative
Demand
Alt 0 -Existing 382 - - - 138 520 520
Alt 1- North Bayshore /
NASA Expansion 756 43 44 773 165 1,781 2,301
Alt 3- East Whisman
Expansion 633 314 947 3,248
Table 4.2 Summary of Proposed Facilities by Phase
Description
Alternative 1 - North
Bayshore Expansion/New
Pipelines(1)
Alternative 1 - North
Bayshore Pipelines to be
Upsized(1)
Alternative 3 - East Whisman
Expansion
Alternative 5a/b/c - Dual
Plumbed Expansion(3)
Pipelines (LF)
6-in Pipeline 3,740 88 2,914
8-in Pipeline 3,219 2,043 17,900
10-in Pipeline - 7,096
12-in Pipeline 5,857 7,922 15,593
16-in Pipeline 943 263
18-in Pipeline 3,775 10,800
Storage Tanks (MG)
Buried Concrete Storge Tank 1.9 2.3
Booster Pumping (hp)
Booster Pumping 215 550
Notes:
(1) Sizing is based on modeling the two tank system and expansion to East Whisman with Tank Option 2 (Charleston Park, North) and a tank in East Whisman. If a different tank location is chosen, high velocity pipelines are subject to change and therefore so would the recommended upsizing. A tank siting study is recommended before the City finalizes the storage tank location. (2) Abbreviations: LF = linear feet; MG = million gallons; hp = horsepower. (3) Storage, booster pumping, and exact piping sizing are subject to changed and should be based on finalized prior system expansions into North Bayshore and East Whisman.
UT"=)
UTUTUT"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)
UT"=)
UT"=)
Jogel
Slough
Shoreline
Lake
HUFF
AVE
PKWY
UT"=)
CALIFORNIA ST
CASTRO ST
SAN ANTONIO RD
MOFFETT BLVD
NASA
Master
Meter
KÍ
KÍ
Shoreline Ponds
Meter
ALTA
AVE
MARINE WAY
STIERLIN CT
CRITTENDEN LN
SHORELINE BLVD
CHARLESTON RD
SHOREBIRD WAY
GARCIA AVE
MACON AVE
AMPHITHEATRE
Irrigation PS
Supply from
RW, Ponds,
or Potable
INDEPENDENCE AVE
RENGSTORFF AVE
OLD MIDDLEFIELD WAY
W MIDDLEFIELD RD
?¾
LOGUE AVE
?Ë
CENTRAL EXPY
MOFFETT BLVD
CENTRAL EXPY
Disclaimer: Features shown in this
figure are for planning purposes and
represent approximate locations.
Engineering and/or survey accuracy
is not implied.
Data Sources: City of Mountain View,
ESRI
O
0 0.60.3
Miles
Last Revised: March 04, 2022 pw://IO-PW-INT.Carollo.local:Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Mountain&space;View/9010C00/Data/GIS/Figure 4.3 Figure 4.3 Preferred Alternative Customers
Legend
"=) Pump Station
UT Existing Tank
North Bayshore Tank Options
Existing Pipeline
North Bayshore Future Pipes
East Whisman Future Pipes
Future Middlefield Routing
to East Whisman
Expansion Areas
City Boundary
Booster Pump
is required along
Middlefield Routing
UT"=)
East Whisman Tank OptionUT"=)
T erminal BLVD Option
Charleston Park
(North) Option
Joaquin Option
Note:The preferred North Bayshore tank
site was selected as North Charleston
Park for the modeling and costs
presented in Chapter 4. However a tank
siting study is recommended to consider
tank locations at Terminus Boulevard
and Joaquin
Preferred Alternative Customers
Existing
Demands Along Middlefield Route
Future Customer
Future East Whisman
Potential Demand
> 5 afy
5 - 15 afy
15 - 40 afy
> 40 afy
CHAPTER 4 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 4 4-10 | MARCH 2022 | FIN AL
-This Page Intentionally Left Blank -
UT"=)
UTUTUT"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)"=)
Jogel
Slough
Shoreline
Lake
HUFF
AVE
PKWY
UT"=)
UT"=)
SAN ANTONIO RD
NASA
Master
Meter
KÍ
KÍ
Shoreline Ponds
Meter
ALTA
AVE
MARINE WAY
STIERLIN CT
CRITTENDEN LN
SHORELINE BLVD
CHARLESTON RD
GARCIA AVE
PEAR AVE
MACON AVE
AMPHITHEATRE
Irrigation PS
Supply from
RW, Ponds,
or Potable
INDEPENDENCE AVE
RENGSTORFF AVE
OLD MIDDLEFIELD WAY
W MIDDLEFIELD RD
MOFFETT BLVD
Disclaimer: Features shown in this
figure are for planning purposes and
represent approximate locations.
Engineering and/or survey accuracy
is not implied.
Data Sources: City of Mountain View,
ESRI
O
0 0.350.175
Miles
Last Revised: March 04, 2022 pw://IO-PW-INT.Carollo.local:Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Mountain&space;View/9010C00/Data/GIS/Figure 4.4 Figure 4.4 North Bayshore Customers
Legend
"=) Pump Station
UT Existing Tank
North Bayshore Tank Options
Existing Pipeline
North Bayshore Future Pipes
Future Middlefield Routing
to East Whisman
Expansion Areas
City Boundary
UT"=)
T erminal BLVD Option
Charleston Park (North) Option
Joaquin Option
Note:The preferred North Bayshore tank
site was selected as North Charleston
Park for the modeling and costs
presented in Chapter 4. However a tank
siting study is recommended to consider
tank locations at Terminus Boulevard
and Joaquin
Preferred Alternative Customers
Existing
Future Customer
Potential Demand
> 5 afy
5 - 15 afy
15 - 40 afy
> 40 afy
CHAPTER 4 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 4 4-12 | MARCH 2022 | FINA L
-This Page Intentionally Left Blank -
CHAPTER 4 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022 | 4-13
4.4 Preliminary Cost Estimates for Recommended Project and Preferred Future Expansion Alternatives
A summary of construction and capital cost estimates for the recommended project (Alternative 1) is presented in Table 4.3. Although expansion to East Whisman via Middlefield Road (Alternative 3) has been deemed the preferred future expansion alternative, costs developed herein are only applicable for the Alternative 1 project. Future Upsizing in North Bayshore is not included in these costs . The tank location and timing of the East Whisman expansion will affect these costs. Also note that to reach East Whisman additional booster pumping would be needed. The estimates are organized by facility types – pipeline, pump station, and storage. A total markup of 62.5 percent was applied to construction costs to account for construction contingency (30 percent), engineering (10 percent), construction management (10 percent), and environmental and legal (5 percent) costs. The cost estimates do not include land acquisition or recycled water costs. It was assumed that land acquisition was not needed since the facilities could be located on City -owned property. and the recycled water supply Agreement does not contain a cost for purchasing recycled water from Palo Alto, so this assumption was used for these estimates as well. The unit construction costs used to develop these estimates were previously presented in Chapter 3 .
Table 4.3 Estimated Capital Cost for the Recommended Project Item Total Cost
($M)
Piping(3) $3.60
Fittings and Valves(3) $0.02
Storage Tank(1, 3) $10.68
Booster Pumping(3) $1.67
SUBTOTAL – Construction $16.0
Construction Contingency (30 percent) $4.79
SUBTOTAL – Construction + Construction
Contingency $20.75
Engineering (10 percent) $2.08
Construction Management (10 percent) $2.08
Environmental and Legal (5 percent) $1.04
TOTAL PROJECT COST(4) $25.94
Notes:
(1) Storage tank costs are conservative and includes a 2.5 factor increase estimated for a buried tank. (2) Pi p i n g c o s t s ar e f u r t h e r r e f i n e d h e r e an d d o n o t m at c h c o s t s f r o m Ch ap t e r 3. (3) These are unit costs.
(4) This reflects the total capital cost.
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 4 4-14 | MARCH 2022 | FINA L
4.5 Funding and Financing Recommendations
The adequate funding of capital and operational costs is a primary consideration when implementing a capital program that would expand facilities and infrastructure. This chapter describes potential funding opportunities and financing mechanisms regarding costs associated with the recommended recycled water program, including an overview of current applicable grants and loan opportunities.
In the course of this discussion, the term “funding” will refer to the method of collecting money to pay for a project or capital program —essentially, any revenue source available to the City, such as user rates and charges, bond proceeds, or unrestricted cash reserve funds. In contrast, the term “financing” will specifically refer to the collection of outside revenue sources, namely grants and/or loans.
4.6 Funding Source Identification
There are two types of costs associated with the recommended project discussed in this chapter :
capital costs required to plan, design, and build the facilitie s/infrastructure; and operational costs required to maintain, operate, and repair those facilities /infrastructure elements.
Capital costs are funded through a variety of sources rang ing from traditional funding options such as pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) funding and bond financing, to non- traditional funding sources such as grants, loans, and market-based programs. The following sections outline mechanisms available to recover both capital and operation and maintenance ( O&M) costs.
The main instruments available for funding capital costs include:
• PAYGO financing — upfront collection of project costs from existing and new users for future capital improvement projects.
• Debt financing — acquisition of funds through borrowing mechanisms. • Grants and loans — alternate sources of funds from public agencies at no or minimal interest cost. Examples include federal, state, and local programs that provide funding at low interest rates for those projects meeting select criteria. • Market based programs — refers to financing through funds obtained from tax credits, purchase agreements, voluntary programs, and trading and offset programs.
Operating revenues remaining after operating expenses and debt service obligations have been met can be a significant source of funding, either as PAYGO funding for capital expenses today or placed in reserves for future projects. Financing methods such as grants and loans can be combined with rate revenues and unrestricted cash reserve funding to develop a complete funding plan. Carollo recommends operational costs be fully funded through use r rates and other recurring annual sources of revenue, and further recommends they not be funded through debt.
4.6.1 PAYG O Funding
PAYGO financing involves periodic collection of capital charges or assessments from customers within the utility’s jurisdiction for funding future capital improvements. These revenues are accumulated in a reserve fund and used for capital projects in future years. P AYGO financing could be used to finance up to 100 percent of a given project or fund only a portion of a given project depending on several factors.
CHAPTER 4 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022 | 4-15
Overall, total costs are typically substantially lower when employing a PAYGO financing approach due to the avoidance of interest payments incurred from bond funding, along with the associated transaction costs (e.g., legal fees, underwriters’ discounts, etc.). However, it is often challenging to employ this funding approach for sizable new or replacement projects, due to the significant amount of cash-on-hand capital required through us of unrestricted cash reserves, or user-rate revenues. If the program is funded through unrestricted cash reserves, the agency must already possess adequate cash-on-hand designated for such a project. If the program is entirely user-rate funded, it coul d significantly increase the agency’s rates and fees if the program represents a sizeable increase in capital needs. Due to these challenges associated with rate and/or reserve funding alone, many agencies ultimately opt to fund major capital expansions through one or more other methods, which typically include bond financing.
4.6.2 Financing Options
4.6.2.1 Debt Financing
There are several different options for debt financing reclaimed water projects, ranging from issuance of short- or long-term bonds.
Revenue Bonds
Revenue bonds are historically the principal method of incurring long -term debt. This method of debt obligation requires specific non -tax revenues such as user charges, facility income, and other funds, pledged to guarantee repayment. There is often no legal limitation on the amount of authorized revenue bonds that may be issued, but from a practical standpoint, the size of the issue must be limited to an amount where annual interest and principal payments are well within the revenues available to fund annual debt service of the revenue bonds. Revenue bond covenants generally include annual debt service coverage provisions, which require that annual revenues from fees less annual operating expenses be some multiple (i.e. 1.25x or more) greater than annual debt service (principal and interest) costs.
Certificates of Participation
Certificates of participation provide long -term financing through a lease agreement that does not require voter approval. The legislative body of the issuing agency is required to approv e the lease arrangement through a resolution. The lessee (the City) would be required to make payments typically from revenues derived from the operation of the facilities. The amount financed may include reserves and capitalized interest for the period th at facilities will be under construction. Within the State of California, most municipal water utility bonds are issued in the form of certificates of participation rather than traditional revenue bonds.
General Obligation Bonds
General obligation (GO) bon ds are municipal securities secured by the issuer’s pledge of its full faith, credit, and taxing power. GO bonds are backed by the general taxing authority of local governments and are often repaid using utility revenues when issued in support of a sewer o r water enterprise fund. In the event that GO bonds are issued for this project, the agency must have the necessary taxing capacity to issue the bonds.
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 4 4-16 | MARCH 2022 | FIN AL
Assessment District Bonds
Financing by this method involves initiating assessment proceedings. Assessmen t proceedings are documents in “Assessment Acts” and “Bond Acts.” An assessment act specifies a procedure for the formation of a district (boundaries), the ordering, and making of an acquisition or improvement, and the levy and confirmation of an assessment secured by liens on land. A bond act provides the procedure for issuance of bonds to represent liens resulting from proceedings taken under an assessment act. Procedural acts include the Municipal Improvements Acts of 1911 and 1913. The commonly used bon d acts are the 1911 Act and the Improvement Bond Act of 1915. The most prevalent procedure is a combination of the 1913 Improvement Act with the 1915 Bond Act. Charges for debt service can be included as a special assessment on the annual property tax bill. The procedure necessary to establish an assessment district may vary depending on the acts under which it is established and the District size.
4.6.2.2 State Grants and Loans
Generally, to qualify for one of California’s state funding programs, a project must me et the following objectives and requirements:
• Demonstrate consistency with the California Water Action Plan (CWAP). • Help meet the State Recycled Water Policy objectives. • Provide environmental documents such as California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) or CEQA plus.
• Protect groundwater resources.
• Demonstrate regional cooperation and partnerships with partners and stakeholders . • Remain consistent with the objectives of U .S. Bureau of Reclamation Title XVI program to reclaim and reuse wastewaters and natur ally impaired ground and surface water in the 17 Western States and Hawaii.
State budget constraints always bring some degree of uncertainty to the future funding ability of these programs. It is therefore recommended these programs be viewed as a potentia l supplement to other funding sources, rather than a standalone funding centerpiece.
Water Recycling Funding Program
One state funding option for the recommended recycled water projects is the Water Recycling Funding (WRF) Program administered by the SWRCB. The program offers grants and loans for planning (including research, feasibility studies, environmental review) and construction (treatment facilities, distribution systems, and storage). The program is financed through Propositions 1 (2014 Water Bond), Proposition 13 (2000 Water Bond), Proposition 68 (2018 Water Bond), and the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF).
The WRFP has a set of guidelines that capital projects must meet to qualify to apply and receive funds. Because the recommended recycled water program is for the purpose of water reuse, it would qualify as an eligible project.
CHAPTER 4 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022 | 4-17
The recommended recycled water program would be eligible for construction funding including grants and loans from a state bond, CW SRF financing, or combinations of funding sources.
Construction grants have been dispersed through Proposition 13 and Proposition 50 .
Construction loans have been dispersed through Proposition 13 and the CWSRF. Like conventional financing, CWSRF financing can be used to fill any funding gaps between the capital plan and available revenues. Compared with conventional debt financing however, CWSRF loans come with more advantageous borrowing terms, including interest rates set at one-half of the state general obligation bond rate and has historically averaged around 2 percent (currently 1.1 percent in California1). The CWSRF offers 30 -year financing options and there are no maximum limits on financing. Furthermore, repayment does not begin until one year following completion of the eligible project.
The SWRCB provides one application package for both construction grants and CWSRF recycled water loans. The application package consists of:
• General Application.
• Financial Application with an Authorized Representative Resolution (Legal Authority) . • Technical Application with a Technical Report/ Feasibility Study. • Environmental documents including CEQA documents .
The SWRCB will review the application package and assess eligibility. Once the SWRCB receives and reviews the final plans and specs, it will issue project performance standards. Once performance standards are agreed to and the applicant chooses a contractor, the parties sign a funding agreement. The applicant must also have an approved Urban Water Management Plan filed with the DWR to receive funds.
4.6.2.3 Federal Grants and Loans
In addition to local and State grants and loans, there are several highly competitive f ederal grant and loan programs that provide financial resources to recycled water projects.
4.6.2.4 Title XVI
The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation administers funds for recycled water feasibility, demonstration, and construction projects through the Water Reclamation and Reuse Program authorized by the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act of 199 2 (Title XVI) and its amendments. The program provides as much as 25 percent of construction costs with a maximum of $20 million. To meet eligibility requirements a project must have a feasibility study, comply with environmental regulations, and demonstra te the ability to pay the remainder of the construction costs. Projects are authorized by Congress and recommended in the President’s annual budget request by the Bureau of Reclamation. Congress then appropriates funds and the Bureau ranks and prioritizes projects and disburses the money on a competitive grant basis each year. Prioritized projects are those that postpone the development of new water supplies, reduce diversions from natural watercourses, and reduce demand on federal water supply facilities, or that have a regional or watershed perspectiv e.
1 Interest rate as of April 2021.
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/grants_loans/srf/docs/trueinterestcost.pdf CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 4 4-18 | MARCH 2022 | FINA L
Table 4.4 State and Federal Funding Programs
Program Agency Type Description
State
Clean Water
State Revolving
Fund (CWSRF)
State Water
Resources and
Control Board
Loan
The State’s CWSRF program provides low interest (50% of the GO bond rate – the current interest rate is
1.1 percent) loans for up to 30 years for the funding of wastewater treatment works, transmission lines, distribution systems, recycled water, and other projects. To be considered for funding, a complete (or as complete as possible) CWSRF Application package (including required technical, environmental, and financial documentation) is due by December 31st for evaluation by the SWRCB based on established scoring criteria. Projects meeting an established priority score (FY 2020 Score was 13 out of 16 points) will be placed on a fundable list for funding in the upcoming fiscal year. As funding for the program is from both Federal and State sources – federal requirements apply including CEQA plus, A&E Procurement, AIS, Davis Bacon, anti-lobbying, and other requirements.
Water
Recycling
Funding (WRF)
Program
State Water
Resources and
Control Board
G ran t / L o an
The WRF Program funds the planning and construction of recycled water treatment facilities such as storage, pumping, groundwater recharge, and distribution systems. The program requires a 50/50 cost share. The program is being run through the CWSRF program (application is same as an SRF application). The Proposition 1 Groundwater Grant funds up to 50 percent of the construction costs with no maximum cap. Application deadline is ongoing and funds are available on a first-come, first serve basis.
Federal
Title XVI U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation Grants
Eligible projects include recycled water feasibility, demonstration, and construction projects. The program provides as much as 25 percent of construction costs with a maximum of $20 million. To meet eligibility requirements a project must have a Bureau of Reclamation approved feasibility study, comply with environmental regulations (National Environmental Policy Act [NEPA]), and demonstrate the ability to pay the remainder of the construction costs.
CHAPTER 4 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022 | 4-19
4.7 Funding Sources and Uses
As requested through the report requirements and specifically as part of the sensitivity analysis, Carollo developed long-range cash flow models based on three scenarios to forecast the City’s revenues and expenses for the recycled water program . These long -range cash flow models were also developed to assist the City in identifying the need for additional funds to execute and implement the recycled water expansion through the North Bayshore project . As part of the sensitivity analysis, t he following three scenarios were considered:
• Scenario 1 (27-year Timeframe) – The City commits to converting 3 sites (out of a total of 81 sites) per year for approximate completion in fiscal year end (FYE) 2048 (approximately a 27-year timeframe).
• Scenario 2 (14-year Timeframe) – The City commits to convert ing 6 sites (out of a total of 81 sites) per year for approximate completion in FYE 20 35 (approximately a 13-year timeframe).
• Scenario 3 (11-year Timeframe) – The City commits to converting 8 sites (out of a total of 81 sites) per year for approximate completion in FYE 203 2 (approximately a 10-year timeframe).
4.7.1 Funding Source s
4.7.1.1 Utility Rates, Charges, and Fees
Utility rates, charges, and fees, such as rates charged to users for each unit of water used or monthly wastewater treatment fees, can be used to fund recycled water system improvements.
The City could also implement a benefit assessment fee through a public voting process, which would recover costs through annual property taxes. Benefit assessment fees are usually included as a separate line item on the annual property tax bill sent to each property owner.
Interest income has also been incorporated into the cash flows and is based on an average of the beginning and ending fund balances (excluding bond proceeds) and further recognizes annual cash flow operations. Carollo assumed an interest income rate of 1.5 percent per annum.
Recycled Water Sales
This analysis used the City’s existing recycled water rate structure which consists of two components, a monthly meter charge based on meter size and a uniform rate based on metered recycled water consum ption. This analysis also assumes no future increases to the monthly meter charge or the uniform rate. The City’s existing recycled water rates are shown on the City’s website and illustrated below in Table 4.5.
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 4 4-20 | MARCH 2022 | FIN AL
Table 4.5 City of Mountain View Existing Recycled Water Rates by Meter Size Meter Size Monthly Rate
5/8-inch $15.55
3/4-inch $15.55
1-inch $31.10
1.5-inch $62.20
2-inch $99.55
3-inch $186.60
4-inch $311.00
6-inch $622.00
8-inch $995.20
10-inch $1,492.80
Note:
(1) Uniform rate of $5.00 per CCF for all metered consumption.
Please note, for purposes of this analysis, all recycled water customers were assumed to possess a 5/8-inch meter. Furthermore, Carollo assumed the existing rates remain in effect throughout the respective study periods evaluated in Scenarios 1 through 3.
Recycled water sales are projected on an annual basis and cumulatively increase as more customers are connected to the recycled water system. Annual projections under each scenario are presented in Table 4.6 below.
Table 4.6 Annual Recycled Water Sale Projections by Scenario Revenue Description Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
Recycled Water Meter
Charges $1,120 $1,120 $1,493
Recycled Water Sales
(Consumption)(1) $93,862 $187,725 $244,042
Total $94,422 $188,844 $245,535
Note:
(1) Uniform rate of $5.00 per CCF for all metered consumption.
4.7.1.2 Avoided Costs
As part of this analysis, Carollo assumed potable sales exceeded the City’s minimum contractual obligations throughout the study period and as such it should be recognized that any amount of recycled water sold as a substitute for potable water allows for incremental revenue to be earned through the sale of potable water to additional potable customers or through increased existing potable water customer demands. In discussions with City staff, Carollo assumed the City’s average cost of potable water is equal to the tier 2 rate for residential single-family customers or $7.01 per one hundred cubic feet ( CCF). In recognition of the benefit of selling recycled water as well as potable water, it was assumed a non -cash benefit (i.e. avoided cost) should be recognized as a revenue line it em in each scenario’s cash flow. Carollo recognizes the avoided cost as a positive (revenue) cash flow which is most easily derived by subtracting the tier 2 potable residential single family rate of $7.0 1 per CCF (recognized as the City’s average cost of potable water) by the current recycled water rate of $5.00 per CCF. This results in an avoided cost benefit CHAPTER 4 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022 | 4-21
(revenue) of $2.01 per CCF of recycled water consumption and is recognized as such throughout each scenarios’ respective study period. Lastly, month ly meter charges are excluded from avoided costs as these charges are identical regardless of the type of service provided (i.e. potable water versus recycled water service).
It’s important to note, Carollo assumed the City would adequately meet its minimu m contractual obligation for potable water sales.
4.7.2 Funding Uses
4.7.2.1 Capital Costs
As stated previously, costs are based on the recommended North Bayshore expansion project only. The project outlined in t his chapter formed the basis for the capital program, assuming a site implementation/start-up rate of three, six or eight sites per year under Scenarios 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Alternative 1 distant projects are also considered even though they are outside the City’s planning horizon. Table 4.3 summarizes the total capital for the recommended project.
Additional annual capital costs are assumed for recycled water system expansion improvements and begin in FYE 2022 at $65,000, increasing 2 perce nt annually throughout each scenarios’ study period.
4.7.2.2 Operating Costs
Annual operations and maintenance costs are identical regardless of scenario (although appear different because each scenario has a different divisor based on the expected study period of 27, 14, or 11-years) and escalate ata rate of 3 percent annually throughout each scenarios’ respective study period. Operations and maintenance costs were estimated as 2 percent of capital costs (excluding Engineering, Construction Management, Environmental, and Legal costs). These costs were included in each year of the cash flow model beginning in FYE 2022 .
4.7.2.3 Total Annual Costs
To develop an annual cost for each project, total costs are distributed over the project duration using a straight line method which considers total costs and divides them equally among the amount of time for completing connection of all 81 sites (i.e. 27-years under Scenario 1, 14-years under Scenario 2 and 11-years under Scenario 3).
These annualized capital costs were combined with annual O&M costs to develop a forecast of costs for each year. Afull detailed annual cost forecast is provided in Appendix G where all values are presented in 2022 dollars for FYE 2022.
As the City continues to connect us ers to the recycled water system, recycled water revenues are projected to exceed O&M , as well as capital costs in the later years. However, the City is projected to fall short of covering both O&M and capital costs in the earlier years of the forecast.
Tables 4.7 through 4.9 depict early results of the cash flows under Scenarios 1 through 3, respectively, through FYE 2036. Additional cash flow details under each Scenario can also be found in Appendix G.
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 4 4-22 | MARCH 2022 | FIN AL
Table 4.7 Scenario 1 (3 Sites per Year) – Projected Annual Cash Flow FYE Revenues
Expenses Net
Revenues O&M Capital –
ALT1
Capital –
Improvements Total Costs
2022 $94,422 $21,779 $1,223,925 $65,000 $1,310,703 -$1,216,281 2023 $188,844 $22,432 $1,223,925 $66,300 $1,312,656 -$1,123,812 2024 $283,266 $23,105 $1,223,925 $67,626 $1,314,655 -$1,031,389 2025 $377,688 $23,798 $1,223,925 $68,979 $1,316,701 -$939,013 2026 $472,110 $24,512 $1,223,925 $70,358 $1,318,795 -$846,684 2027 $566,533 $25,247 $1,223,925 $71,765 $1,320,937 -$754,405 2028 $660,955 $26,005 $1,223,925 $73,201 $1,323,130 -$662,175 2029 $755,377 $26,785 $1,223,925 $74,665 $1,325,374 -$569,997 2030 $849,799 $27,588 $1,223,925 $76,158 $1,327,671 -$477,872 2031 $944,221 $28,416 $1,223,925 $77,681 $1,330,022 -$385,801 2032 $1,038,643 $29,269 $1,223,925 $79,235 $1,332,428 -$293,785 2033 $1,133,065 $30,147 $1,223,925 $80,819 $1,334,890 -$201,825 2034 $1,227,487 $31,051 $1,223,925 $82,436 $1,337,411 -$109,924 2035 $1,321,909 $31,983 $1,223,925 $84,084 $1,339,991 -$18,082 2036 $1,416,331 $32,942 $1,223,925 $85,766 $1,342,633 $73,699
Table 4.8 Scenario 2 (6 Sites per Year) – Projected Annual Cash Flow FYE Revenues
Expenses
Net
Revenues O&M Capital –
ALT1
Capital –
Improvements Total Costs
2022 $188,844 $43,557 $2,447,849 $65,000 $2,556,406 -$2,367,562 2023 $377,688 $44,864 $2,447,849 $66,300 $2,559,013 -$2,181,324 2024 $566,533 $46,210 $2,447,849 $67,626 $2,561,685 -$1,995,152 2025 $755,377 $47,596 $2,447,849 $68,979 $2,564,424 -$1,809,047 2026 $944,221 $49,024 $2,447,849 $70,358 $2,567,231 -$1,623,010 2027 $1,133,065 $50,495 $2,447,849 $71,765 $2,570,109 -$1,437,044 2028 $1,321,909 $52,009 $2,447,849 $73,201 $2,573,059 -$1,251,150 2029 $1,510,753 $53,570 $2,447,849 $74,665 $2,576,083 -$1,065,330 2030 $1,699,598 $55,177 $2,447,849 $76,158 $2,579,184 -$879,586 2031 $1,888,442 $56,832 $2,447,849 $77,681 $2,582,362 -$693,920 2032 $2,077,286 $58,537 $2,447,849 $79,235 $2,585,621 -$508,335 2033 $2,266,130 $60,293 $2,447,849 $80,819 $2,588,962 -$322,831 2034 $2,454,974 $62,102 $2,447,849 $82,436 $2,592,387 -$137,412 2035 $2,642,699 $63,965 $2,447,849 $84,084 $2,595,899 $46,800 2036 $2,830,424 $65,884 $2,447,849 $85,766 $2,599,499 $230,924 CHAPTER 4 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022 | 4-23
Table 4.9 Scenario 3 (8 Sites per Year) – Projected Annual Cash Flow FYE Revenues
Expenses Net
Revenues O&M Capital –
ALT1
Capital –
Improvements Total Costs
2022 $245,535 $56,624 $3,182,204 $65,000 $3,303,828 -$3,058,293 2023 $491,070 $58,323 $3,182,204 $66,300 $3,306,827 -$2,815,757 2024 $736,604 $60,073 $3,182,204 $67,626 $3,309,902 -$2,573,298 2025 $982,139 $61,875 $3,182,204 $68,979 $3,313,057 -$2,330,918 2026 $1,227,674 $63,731 $3,182,204 $70,358 $3,316,293 -$2,088,619 2027 $1,473,209 $65,643 $3,182,204 $71,765 $3,319,612 -$1,846,403 2028 $1,718,743 $67,612 $3,182,204 $73,201 $3,323,017 -$1,604,273 2029 $1,964,278 $69,641 $3,182,204 $74,665 $3,326,509 -$1,362,231 2030 $2,209,813 $71,730 $3,182,204 $76,158 $3,330,091 -$1,120,279 2031 $2,454,974 $73,882 $3,182,204 $77,681 $3,333,767 -$878,792 2032 $2,699,016 $76,098 $3,182,204 $79,235 $3,337,537 -$638,520 2033 $2,943,058 $78,381 $3,182,204 $80,819 $3,341,404 -$398,346 2034 $3,187,100 $80,733 $3,182,204 $82,436 $3,345,372 -$158,272 2035 $3,431,142 $83,155 $3,182,204 $84,084 $3,349,443 $81,699 2036 $3,675,184 $85,649 $3,182,204 $85,766 $3,353,619 $321,565
4.8 Funding Plan Options
4.8.1 Pay-As-Yo u-Go and Reserve Funding
As discussed, PAYGO involves funding the capital program through rate revenues as projects occur. This can be combined with reserve funding to fund the capital program. Sources of revenues include user rates and fees. However, having sufficient cash flow and/or reserves is a substantial challenge for this approach. The utility must possess substantial reserves in order to adequately fund the capital program, and rates must typically rise continually in order to produce adequate PAYGO revenues.
4.8.2 Debt Financing
Alternatively, th e City could pursue debt financing, including both convention al and CWSRF loans.
4.8.2.1 Conventional Financing
Conventional financing typically consists of a 30 -year term with an interest rate between 3 and 5 percent. In addition, conventional financing often requires the borrower maintain a debt service reserve fund. Additionally, t he City would also have to monit or its debt service coverage ratio to ensure it is meeting the bond coverage ratio stipulated in the bond offering document or official statement.
4.8.2.2 State Revolving Fund (SRF) Financing
The California SRF has a set of guidelines that capital projects must me et in order to qualify to apply for and receive funds. Eligible projects include:
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 4 4-24 | MARCH 2022 | FIN AL
• Wastewater treatment plants.
• Sewer collectors and interceptors.
• Combined sewers.
• Septic to sewer conversions.
• Storm water reduction and treatment.
• Water reclamation facilities.
Because the recommended recycled water program is for the purposes of water reclamation, it would qualify as an eligible project. Similar to conventional financing, SRF financing can be used to fill any funding gaps between the capi tal plan and available revenues. However, when comparing conventional debt financing to SRF loans, SRF loans come with more advantageous borrowing terms, including below market interest rate s (currently 1.2 percent in California) and lower fees (i.e. cost of issuance). Furthermore, repayment does not begin until one year following completion of the eligible project. In contrast, conventional debt financing repayment typically begins immediately. Repayment can be postponed, but interest is capitalized (i.e. accrues annually and must be repaid) in the interim.
One consideration regarding SRF funding is how disbursements are managed. Under conventional financing, the entire amount of proceeds are made upfront and therefore immediately available to the borrower. However, the SRF program requires agencies to fund the costs upfront (from cash, reserves, bridge-financing, etc.) and then submit receipts and forms for reimbursement. Typically, this process takes about three- months.
4.9 Comparative Cash Flow Analysis
Under each Scenario, Carollo provided comparative cash flows assuming the PAYGO and conventional financing (assuming 30-year revenue bonds at 4 percent interest excluding a debt service reserve fund) funding approaches described above. Results of these comparat ive cash flow analyses are provided in Appendix H . It is important to note, the primary difference between each Scenario relates to the pace at which recycled water customers are connected to the recycled water system and as such, the pace at which revenues are received as well as respective costs incurred.
4.9.1 Projected Annual Cash Flow under PA YGO Funding Assuming PAYGO funding u nder Scenario 1, the City would require additional cash of approximately $3.985M from FYE 2022 through FYE 2029 to meet expected cash flow deficits and remain financially viable.
Similarly, under Scenario 2 and assuming PAYGO funding, the City would require additional cash of approximately $ 7.165M from FYE 2022 through FYE 20 29 to meet expected cash flow deficits and remain financially viable.
It’s important to note, assuming PAYGO funding under Scenario 3, the City would require additional cash of approximately $ 8.965M from FYE 2022 through FYE 20 29 to meet expected cash flow deficits and remain financially viable.
Please refer to Appendix H for specific cash flow results under each of the three PAYGO funding scenarios.
CHAPTER 4 | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY| CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022 | 4-25
4.9.2 Projected Annual Cash Flow under Conventional Financing Carollo evaluated long-range cash flows under each Scenario and developed an adequat e balance between user rate revenues and debt issuances to meet projected revenue requirements. Carollo assumed the City will issue 30 -year revenue bonds at an assumed interest rate of 4 percent and will not require creation of, or a deposit to, a formal debt service reserve fund. Carollo has forecasted debt issuances, as needed once every three years, totaling $6.870, $12.200, and $15.215 million, respectively under Scenarios 1, 2, and 3, to adequately meet projected cash flow shortfalls.
4.10 Sensitivity Analysis
The sensitivity analysis is developed to project the impact of any shortfalls in demand that may occur. Demand may not materialize as anticipated, or key stakeholders may back out of the projects. These potential changes in assumptions could result in the City paying a larger proportionate share of costs.
4.10.1 Unit Cost Calculation
Unit cost calculations are often the simplest method of representing sensitivity analyses.
Therefore resulting impact s of each scenario can be easily demonstrated through unit cost calculations. The unit costs at buildout for each Scenario are outlined in Table 4.10. Total costs have been summed over the respective scenarios’ study periods (including retirement of all debt issued under their respective scenarios) and divided by the projected total recycled water demand at buildout (4 69,300 acre feet).
Table 4.10 Unit Cost Calculation
Scenario Total Cost
($)
AF
(at Buildout) $ / AF
Scenario 1 – 27-year $41,069,352 469,300 $88
Scenario 2 – 14-year $49,146,879 469,300 $105
Scenario 3 – 11-year $54,219,714 469,300 $116
4.10.2 Sensitivity Analysis Results
Using the unit costs derived in Table 4.11, the sensitivity analysis tested the unit costs under a variety of lower demand scenarios, ranging from a 5 percent reduction all the way down to 20 percent. Presenting these reduced scenarios provides the City an idea of the magnitude in changing costs per acre foot if full demand is not realized as expected. This analysis did not take into account any reduced operating costs and assumed these costs are fixed regardless of actual demands. T a b l e 4.14 summarizes the unit cos t sensitivity analysis results.
Table 4.11 Unit Cost Sensitivity Analysis
Scenario Baseline
($/AF)
5% Reduct ion
($/AF)
10% Reduction
($/AF)
2 0% R educ t ion
($/AF)
Scenario 1 – 26-year $88 $92 $97 $109
Scenario 2 – 13-year $105 $110 $116 $131
Scenario 3 – 10-year $116 $122 $128 $144
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CHAPTER 4 4-26 | MARCH 2022 | FIN AL
-This Page Intentionally Left Blank -
APPENDICES | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022
Appendix A
REFERENCES
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | ABBREVIATIONS MARCH 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left Blank -
APPENDIX A | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW DRAFT | MAY ͮͬͮͭ | A‐ͭ
References
California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region (RWQCB), ͮͬͬͯ. A Comprehensive Groundwater Protection Evaluation for the South San Francisco Bay Basins, prepared by: The Groundwater Committee of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Region In coordination with: Alameda County Water District, Santa Clara Valley Water District, San Mateo County Environmental Health Services Division, dated May ͮͬͬͯ.
California Department of Water Resources (DWR), ͮͬͬͰ. Santa Clara Valley Groundwater Basin, Santa Clara Subbasin, dated February ͮͳ, ͮͬͬͰ.
Carollo Engineers, ͮͬͭͰ. Recycled Water Feasibility Study, dated March ͮͬͭͰ.
Mountain View, ͮͬͭͭ. Mountain View ͮͬͯͬ General Plan, Public Review Draft dated November ͯͬ, ͮͬͭͭ, adopted by City Council on July ͭͬ, ͮͬͭͮ.
Mountain View, ͮͬͭͰ. City of Mountain View, North Bayshore Precise Plan, dated November ͮͱ, ͮͬͭͰ.
Mountain View, ͮͬͭͲ. City of Mountain View ͮͬͭͱ Urban Water Management Plan, dated June ͮͰ, ͮͬͭͲ.
Mountain View, ͮͬͭ͵. City of Mountain View, East Whisman Precise Plan, dated November ͱ, ͮͬͭ͵.
Mountain View, ͮͬͮͭ. City of Mountain View ͮͬͮͬ Urban Water Management Plan, Administrative Draft, dated April ͮͲ, ͮͬͮͭ.
Palo Alto, ͮͬͭͳ. Final Advanced Water Purification System Feasibility Study, dated May ͮͱ,ͮͬͭͳ.
RWQCB, ͮͬͬͳ. San Francisco Bay Basin (Region ͮ) Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), dated January ͭʹ, ͮͬͬͳ.
Santa Clara Valley Water District, ͮͬͭͲ. ͮͬͭͲ Groundwater Management Plan, Santa Clara and Llagas Subbasins, dated November ͮͬͭͲ.
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | ABBREVIATIONS MARCH 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left Blank -
APPENDICES | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022
Appendix B
LETTERS OF SUPPORT
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | ABBREVIATIONS MARCH 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left Blank -
APPENDICES | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022
Appendix C
RECYCLED WATER USE AGREEMENT
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | ABBREVIATIONS MARCH 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left Blank -
1 of 8
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO
THE FIRST AMENDED AND RESTATED CONTRACT NO. C059999
BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND THE CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW This Amendment No. 1 to the FIRST AMENDED AND RESTATED CONTRACT NO. C059999 BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND THE CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW, is entered into _August 28,_2017, by an d between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a chartered city and a municipal corporation of the State of California (“PALO ALTO”), and the CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW, a charter ed city and a municipal corporation of the State of California (“MOUNTAIN VIEW”).
RECITALS
WHEREAS, on January 11, 2005, PALO ALTO and MOUNTAIN VIEW entered into an agreement (AGREEMENT) defining the cost sharing of the Mountain View- Moffett Area Recycled Water Facility Project, including the Project’s design and related construction expenses, the allocation of re lated grant revenues, and the repayment of loans; and
WHEREAS, on June 18, 2007, PALO ALTO and MOUNTAIN VIEW amended and restated the entire AGREEMENT; and
WHEREAS, PALO ALTO and MOUN TAIN VIEW wish to amend the AGREEMENT to extend the term of the AG REEMENT and add language defining each Party’s responsibility for the costs of ope rating and maintaining the recycled water portion of the Joint System.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of th e recitals and mutual promises of the Parties contained herein, PALO ALTO and MOUNTAIN VIEW agree to the below- referenced amendments to the AGREEMENT as follows:
SECTION 1: The following sections of the AGREEMENT are replaced in their entirety:
1.2 Scope of AGREEMENT
(a)
This AGREEMENT is intended to set forth the general terms and conditions for implementation and ope ration of the PROJECT described in Section
1.1 of this AGREEMENT, as well as the financia l obligations of each Party with respect DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BFA5669-8DE3-4C02-A65D-59C8F20DCBC8 2 of 8
to design, construction, construction management, State and Federal grants, and repayment of the SRF loan.
(b) This AGREEMENT, including this Amendment No. 1,
covers beneficial, nonpotable recycled wate r uses such as landscape irrigation using disinfected tertiary recycled water treate d pursuant to Cal. Code Regs., Title 22, § 60301.230. This AGREEMENT does not cover activities by PALO ALTO, MOUNTAIN VIEW, or any other party to repl enish groundwater resources, including spreading basins, percolation ponds, or injection through groundwater wells.
Furthermore, this AGREEMENT does not cove r direct potable reuse (Water Code, § 13561(b)), indirect potable reuse for ground water recharge (Water Code, § 13561(c)), or surface water augmentation (Water Code, § 13561(d)).
1.4 Term of AGREEMENT
Unless earlier terminated as provided in Section 9.3 or according to the terms set forth in Section 1.4.1, the oblig ations and responsibilities of the Parties commenced on January 11, 2005 and shall expire on December 31, 2060.
4.1 Recycled Water Operation and Maintenance Costs to Partner Agencies
(a) Background. The RWQCP is required to produce treated wastewater of sufficient quality to meet it s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) Permit requirements fo r discharge to San Francisco Bay. The RWQCP’s NPDES Permit also requires the RWQCP to produce tertiary treated water of sufficient quality to meet State Title 17 an d Title 22 requirements for irrigation and reuse. Historically, the RWQCP’s margin al operating and maintenance costs of recycled water production and distributi on (“Marginal O&M Costs”) have been negligible and have not been charged dire ctly to Partners who have received the recycled water. Now, the Parties wish to eq uitably allocate Marginal O&M Costs to the Partners using the recycled water.
(b) Recycled Water Operation and Maintenance Cost
Determination Process. The Marginal O&M Costs will be charged to the particular Partner agencies in proportion to their us age, as determined in Section 8.3. PALO ALTO in its capacity as the RWQCP Administ rator (referred to herein as the “RWQCP Administrator”) will work cooperatively with the Partner agencies to determine the Marginal O&M Costs by December 1, 20 18, and by July 1, 2019 will begin charging Partners who use recycled water. The RWQ CP Administrator will evaluate and adjust the Marginal O& M Costs annually by July 1 of each year.
(c) Recycled Water Production Charges. The Basic Agreement No. 2963 between PALO ALTO, MOUNTAIN VIEW, and LOS ALTOS, dated October DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BFA5669-8DE3-4C02-A65D-59C8F20DCBC8 3 of 8
10, 1968, (“Basic Agreement”) addresses revenue fr om distribution of recycled water.
The Marginal O&M Costs established pursuant to Section 4.1(b) of this Amendment are consistent with Section 15 of the Basic Agreement, wherein PALO ALTO, as the Administrator, determines such costs. Revenue to the RWQCP from the Marginal O&M Costs established pursuant to Section 4.1(b) shall be considered Joint System revenue for all parties to the Basic Agreement.
(d) No Recycled Water Commodity Charge. There shall be no recycled water commodity charge to any Part ner, as long as the receiving Partner is below its entitlement, as described in Sect ion 16 of the Basic Agreement. Partner requests for recycled water that exceed th e available recycled water supply shall be handled as described in Section 16 of the Basic Agreement.
6.2 Rights to Acquire and Sell Recycled Water
(a) Right to Acquire. Section 16 of Basic Agreement addresses rights of the Parties to acquire wastewater by-products, including recycled water, from the RWQCP commensurate with the Party’s co ntribution of wastewater input flow to the total plant flow at the RWQCP.
(b) Right to Sell. Subject to the provisions of Sections 6.1, 6.3,
6.4, and 6.5 of this AGREEMENT, MOUNTAIN VIEW and PALO ALTO maintain the right to sell recycled water, consistent with State regulations and the Water Reuse Permit, within and outside their respective jurisdictional limits provided they do not exceed their corresponding right to the use of wastewater products as set forth in Section 8.2 of this AGREEMENT.
(c) Changes to Recycled Water and Wastewater Allocation and/or Entitlement. Should either MOUNTAIN VIEW or PALO ALTO desire a quantity of recycled water or wastewater th at requires an increase in the current recycled water capacity allocation listed in Section 8.2 of this AGREEMENT, or the wastewater entitlement contained in Sect ion 16 of the Basic Agreement, MOUNTAIN VIEW and PALO ALTO shall meet and confer in good faith concerning the use of their allocation or entitlement, and future plan s for utilization of their allocation or entitlement. The temporary exceedance of a Party’s available allocation under Section
8.2 of this AGREEMENT, or a Party’s entitlement under Section 16 of the Basic Agreement, shall not be unreasonably withheld by MOUNTAIN VIEW or PALO ALTO, as RWQCP Administrator. Should the Parties fail to agree on such temporary use, the Administrator shall determine temporary usage allocations, consistent with the Parties’ actual usage so long as the Party not seeking a temporary exceedance is not utilizing its full Section 8.2 capacity allocation.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BFA5669-8DE3-4C02-A65D-59C8F20DCBC8 4 of 8
8.2 Delivery Schedules
PALO ALTO, as the RWQCP Administrator, shall make recycled water available to MOUNTAIN VIEW on a dema nd basis, with a peak flow rate of up to two thousand eighty-five (2,085) gallons pe r minute (up to a total of three (3) million gallons per day), and a peak flow rate to PA LO ALTO of up to six hundred ninety-five (695) gallons per minute (up to a total of one (1) million gallons per day). MOUNTAIN VIEW and PALO ALTO shall coordinate recycled water demand within their jurisdictions to maximize operational effi ciency of the RWQCP. The allocations contained in this section are consistent with the rights of the Parties to use wastewater products as set forth in the Basic Agreement.”
SECTION 2: The following sections are added to the AGREEMENT:
1.2.1 Future Capital Projects
Future recycled water capital projects, including replacement projects, capacity expansion projects, an d projects to add treatment units or improvements are not covered by this AG REEMENT. A new or modified agreement will be used to determine cost allocation and other key project parameters for the aforementioned projects. For exampl e, PALO ALTO, MOUNTAIN VIEW, and the Santa Clara Valley Water District are evaluating the feasibility of advanced water purification at the RWQCP, and such a proj ect, if undertaken, would require a new or modified agreement between the relevant Parties to determine cost and capacity allocations. The Parties’ consideration and exploration of these recycled water initiatives should not be interpreted to pr event the Parties from exploring other new technologies.
1.4.1 Expiration of Basic Agreement Controls Term of this AGREEMENT
The Basic Agreement initial term was fifty (50) years. Addendum 8 to the Basic Agreement extended the te rm through December 31, 2060. The Basic Agreement is the foundation for operation of the RWQCP. If the Basic Agreement expires at any time prior to the term stated in Section 1.4 of this AGREEMENT (December 31, 2060), this AGREEMENT and all Amendments thereto shall automatically expire concurrent with the expiration of the Basic Agreement.
5.3 System Reliability
MOUNTAIN VIEW and PALO ALTO acknowledge it is necessary to develop and maintain a reliable recycl ed water system and the RWQCP may incur capital design and construction costs to enhance reliability needs based on the nature DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BFA5669-8DE3-4C02-A65D-59C8F20DCBC8 5 of 8
and types of use set forth in Exhibit L of the AGREEMENT. MOUNTAIN VIEW and PALO ALTO will monitor the joint system and as needs are identified, work cooperatively to incorporate improvements, including, but not limited to, water storage, backup pumping, and emergency power supply equipment. If either Party requests specific improvements to the recycled wa ter joint system, the RWQCP Administrator will review and determine if the request is above and beyond the needs for the type of use set forth in the Facility Plan. The RW QCP Administrator will determine the cost share for improvements beyond the needs fo r the type of use set forth in the Facility Plan. The RWQCP, MOUNTAIN VIEW, an d PALO ALTO will not unreasonably withhold approval of, and will contribute funding for, improvements that will increase system reliability and enhance the long-term use of recycled water.
5.4 Recycled Water Transmission Line to Mountain View
Either Party may use the transmi ssion line, without additional cost, to accept delivery of higher amounts of recy cled water than stated in Sections 8.2 and
8.3 so long as the other (or second) Party’s ability to obtain its Section 8.2 recycled water capacity allocation is not impacted. If th e second Party cannot ob tain its Section 8.2 capacity allocation, the first Party must redu ce incremental deliveries until the second Party can secure its Section 8.2 capacity allocation.
8.3 Usage
(c) Currently, all recycled water supplied by the RWQCP to Partners is used for irrigation, constr uction project uses, and decorative water impoundments and features, in compliance with the RWQCP’s existing Water Reuse Permit from the RWQCB. Both the Wat er Reuse Permit and the Facility Plan acknowledge potential additional types of wa ter reuse, such as dual plumbing, in the future.
(d) If MOUNTAIN VIEW or PALO ALTO request additional
types of use of recycled water to be supplied by the RWQCP, the RWQCP Administrator will review the RWQCP’s Water Reuse Permit, operational capability, and conditions and capacities of its facilit ies, and determine if the request can be accommodated. The RWQCP Administrator has the right to deny such request in favor of the safe and proper operation of wastewate r treatment priorities to meet regulatory requirements. If the RWQCP Administrator determines it can accommodate such request, the RWQCP Administrator will review the operations and the type of upgrades needed, and determine the requesting Par ty’s costs for the upgrades and required operational and maintenance funding need ed to accommodate the request. The requesting Party shall pay for any improv ements needed for the RWQCP to provide recycled water for additional types of uses, including the marginal costs of production.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BFA5669-8DE3-4C02-A65D-59C8F20DCBC8 6 of 8
(e) MOUNTAIN VIEW has requested the addition of dual
plumbing as part of its reuse, and the RWQCP has determined that dual plumbing is a permitted use under its Water Reuse Permit (Exhibit A) and current State Title 17 and 22 regulations. The total quantity, schedule, and rate of delivery of recycled water to MOUNTAIN VIEW shall remain unchanged.
(f) MOUNTAIN VIEW and PALO ALTO agree to enforce any
and all regulatory requirements for dual plumbing, landscape irrigation and other recycled water uses within each Party’s juri sdiction, including, but not limited to, the following requirement for dual-plumbed build ings: both Parties shall require an on- site, automatically activated potable water backup to be used when recycled water service is disrupted, shutdown, or is otherwise unavailable.
8.6 Level of Service
(d) MOUNTAIN VIEW and PALO ALTO acknowledge their
mutual goal of continuing to reduce th e total dissolved solids (TDS), sodium, and chloride levels in the RWQCP’s recycled water over time. To that end, in 2010, MOUNTAIN VIEW and PALO ALTO each adopted a Recycled Water Salinity Reduction Policy to identify and pursue a ll cost-effective measures to reduce the salinity of the recycled water delivered from the RWQCP. These efforts resulted in declines in the salinity levels at the RWQCP.
T o c o n t i n u e t h i s p r o g ress, MOUNTAIN VIEW and PALO ALTO agree to maintain their ongoing sali nity level monitoring and reduction efforts for the term of the Basic Agreement, or unt il both Parties mutually determine that such efforts are no longer needed. In recogn ition of salinity reduction efforts already undertaken, each Party reserves the right to prioritize its capital improvement projects in its sole discretion. Salinity reduction efforts may include, but are not limited to:
1.) targeted public and private sewer system
rehabilitation and/or repair;
2.) targeted investigation of saline water infiltration;
3.) targeted investigation and monitoring of saline water dischargers; outreach to dischargers with higher than permitted TDS, sodium, and chloride constituents; and enforcement of each agency’s sewer use ordinance;
4.) consideration of total sodium, chloride, and TDS load as criteria for prioritizing sewer rehabilitatio n as contemplated in each agency’s sewer master plan updates; and
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BFA5669-8DE3-4C02-A65D-59C8F20DCBC8 7 of 8
5.) other necessary controls to reduce salinity to mutually acceptable and achievable levels.
9.15 Dispute Resolution
Should any dispute or controve rsy arise between the Parties with respect to this AGREEMENT that cannot be settled after engaging in good faith negotiations, the Parties agree to resolve the dispute in accordance with the following:
(a) Each Party shall designate a senior management or executive level representative to negotiate any dispute;
(b) The representatives shall attempt, through good-faith negotiations, to resolve the dispute by any means within their authority;
(c) If the issue remains unresolved after sixty (60) days of good- faith negotiations, the Parties shall attempt to resolve the dispute by negotiation between legal counsel. If the above process fails, the Parties shall resolve any remaining disputes through mediation to expedite the resolution of the dispute.
(d) The mediation process shal l provide for the selection within thirty (30) days by both Parties of a disi nterested third person as mediation, shall commence within thirty (30) days and shall be concluded within sixty (60) days from the commencement of the mediation. Mediation shall be nonbinding.
(e) The Parties shall equally bear the costs of any third party in any alternative dispute resolution process.
(f) The alternative dispute resolution process is a material condition to this AGREEMENT and must be exhausted prior to either Party initiating legal action. This alternative dispute resolution process is not intended to nor shall be construed to change the time periods for filing a claim or action specified by Government Code Sections 900, et seq.”
SECTION 3: All other sections of the AGREEMENT remain in full force and effect.
///
///
///
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BFA5669-8DE3-4C02-A65D-59C8F20DCBC8 8 of 8
This Amendment No. 1, made and entere d into this 28 day of August 2017, by and between:
“CITY OF PALO ALTO”:
a chartered city and a municipal
corporation of the State of California
By:
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
“CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW”:
a chartered city and a municipal
corporation of the State of California
By: ________________________________
Public Works Director
By:
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
FINANCIAL APPROVAL:
Finance and Administrative
Services Director
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BFA5669-8DE3-4C02-A65D-59C8F20DCBC8
Certificate Of Completion
Envelope Id: 1BFA56698DE34C02A65D59C8F20DCBC8
Status: Completed
Subject: Please DocuSign: Amendment 1 Contract C0599999 28August2017.pdf Source Envelope:
Document Pages: 8
Signatures: 6
Envelope Originator:
Certificate Pages: 5
Initials: 0
Lisa Navarret
AutoNav: Enabled
EnvelopeId Stamping: Enabled
Time Zone: (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
250 Hamilton Ave
Palo Alto , CA 94301
[email protected]
IP Address: 12.220.157.20
Record Tracking
Status: Original
9/18/2017 7:32:35 AM
Holder: Lisa Navarret
[email protected]
Location: DocuSign
Signer Events
Signature
Timestamp
Michael Fuller
[email protected]
Security Level: Email, Account Authentication
(None)
Using IP Address: 38.99.34.33
Sent: 9/18/2017 8:48:31 AM
Viewed: 9/25/2017 8:47:59 AM
Signed: 9/27/2017 7:54:32 AM
Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure:
Not Offered via DocuSign
Patty Kong
[email protected]
Security Level: Email, Account Authentication
(None)
Using IP Address: 38.99.34.33
Sent: 9/27/2017 7:54:34 AM
Viewed: 9/27/2017 4:50:17 PM
Signed: 9/27/2017 5:35:59 PM
Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure:
Not Offered via DocuSign
Jannie Quinn
[email protected]
Security Level: Email, Account Authentication
(None)
Using IP Address: 73.231.201.157
Sent: 9/27/2017 5:36:01 PM
Viewed: 9/27/2017 7:09:29 PM
Signed: 9/27/2017 7:12:17 PM
Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure:
Not Offered via DocuSign
Dan Rich
[email protected]
Security Level: Email, Account Authentication
(None)
Using IP Address: 38.99.34.33
Sent: 9/27/2017 7:12:19 PM
Viewed: 9/28/2017 8:55:20 AM
Signed: 9/28/2017 8:56:17 AM
Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure:
Not Offered via DocuSign
Sandra Lee
[email protected]
Assistant City Attorney
Security Level: Email, Account Authentication
(None)
Using IP Address: 12.220.157.20
Sent: 9/28/2017 8:56:19 AM
Viewed: 9/28/2017 8:56:47 AM
Signed: 9/28/2017 8:57:28 AM
Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure:
Signer Events
Signature
Timestamp
Not Offered via DocuSign
James Keene
[email protected]
City Manager
City of Palo Alto
Security Level: Email, Account Authentication
(None)
Using IP Address: 50.206.118.3
Signed using mobile
Sent: 9/28/2017 8:57:29 AM
Viewed: 10/12/2017 10:49:52 AM
Signed: 10/12/2017 10:50:04 AM
Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure:
Accepted: 4/14/2015 5:40:07 PM
ID: 44fe333a-6a81-4cb7-b7d4-925473ac82e3
In Person Signer Events
Signature
Timestamp
Editor Delivery Events
Status
Timestamp
Agent Delivery Events
Status
Timestamp
Intermediary Delivery Events
Status
Timestamp
Certified Delivery Events
Status
Timestamp
Carbon Copy Events
Status
Timestamp
Karin North
[email protected]
Security Level: Email, Account Authentication
(None)
Sent: 10/12/2017 10:50:05 AM
Viewed: 10/31/2017 4:09:22 PM
Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure:
Not Offered via DocuSign
Notary Events
Signature
Timestamp
Envelope Summary Events
Status
Timestamps
Envelope Sent
Hashed/Encrypted
10/12/2017 10:50:05 AM
Certified Delivered
Security Checked
10/12/2017 10:50:05 AM
Signing Complete
Security Checked
10/12/2017 10:50:05 AM
Completed
Security Checked
10/12/2017 10:50:05 AM
Payment Events
Status
Timestamps
Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure
CONSUMER DISCLOSURE
From time to time, City of Palo Alto (we, us or Company) may be required by law to provide to you certain written notices or disclosures. Described below are the terms and conditions for providing to you such notices and disclosures electronically through your DocuSign, Inc. (DocuSign) Express user account. Please read the information below carefully and thoroughly, and if you can access this information electronically to your satisfaction and agree to these terms and conditions, please confirm your agreement by clicking the 'I agree' button at the bottom of this document.
Getting paper copies
At any time, you may request from us a paper copy of any record provided or made available electronically to you by us. For such copies, as long as you are an authorized user of the DocuSign system you will have the ability to download and print any documents we send to you through your DocuSign user account for a limited period of time (usually 30 days) after such documents are first sent to you. After such time, if you wish for us to send you paper copies of any such documents from our office to you, you will be charged a $0.00 per-page fee. You may request delivery of such paper copies from us by following the procedure described below.
Withdrawing your consent
If you decide to receive notices and disclosures from us electronically, you may at any time change your mind and tell us that thereafter you want to receive required notices and disclosures only in paper format. How you must inform us of your decision to receive future notices and disclosure in paper format and withdraw your consent to receive notices and disclosures electronically is described below.
Consequences of changing your mind
If you elect to receive required notices and disclosures only in paper format, it will slow the speed at which we can complete certain steps in transactions with you and delivering services to you because we will need first to send the required notices or disclosures to you in paper format, and then wait until we receive back from you your acknowledgment of your receipt of such paper notices or disclosures. To indicate to us that you are changing your mind, you must withdraw your consent using the DocuSign 'Withdraw Consent' form on the signing page of your DocuSign account. This will indicate to us that you have withdrawn your consent to receive required notices and disclosures electronically from us and you will no longer be able to use your DocuSign Express user account to receive required notices and consents electronically from us or to sign electronically documents from us.
All notices and disclosures will be sent to you electronically Unless you tell us otherwise in accordance with the procedures described herein, we will provide electronically to you through your DocuSign user account all required notices, disclosures, authorizations, acknowledgements, and other documents that are required to be provided or made available to you during the course of our relationship with you. To reduce the chance of you inadvertently not receiving any notice or disclosure, we prefer to provide all of the required notices and disclosures to you by the same method and to the same address that you have given us. Thus, you can receive all the disclosures and notices electronically or in paper format through the paper mail delivery system. If you do not agree with this process, please let us know as described below. Please also see the paragraph immediately above that describes the consequences of your electing not to receive delivery of the notices and disclosures electronically from us.
Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure created on: 10/1/2013 8:33:53 AM Parties agreed to: James Keene
How to contact City of Palo Alto:
You may contact us to let us know of your changes as to how we may contact you electronically, to request paper copies of certain information from us, and to withdraw your prior consent to receive notices and disclosures electronically as follows:
To contact us by email send messages to: [email protected]
To advise City of Palo Alto of your new e-mail address
To let us know of a change in your e-mail address where we should send notices and disclosures electronically to you, you must send an email message to us at [email protected] and in the body of such request you must state: your previous e-mail address, your new e-mail address. We do not require any other information from you to change your email address..
In addition, you must notify DocuSign, Inc to arrange for your new email address to be reflected in your DocuSign account by following the process for changing e-mail in DocuSign.
To request paper copies from City of Palo Alto
To request delivery from us of paper copies of the notices and disclosures previously provided by us to you electronically, you must send us an e-mail to [email protected] and in the body of such request you must state your e-mail address, full name, US Postal address, and telephone number. We will bill you for any fees at that time, if any.
To withdraw your consent with City of Palo Alto
To inform us that you no longer want to receive future notices and disclosures in electronic format you may:
i. decline to sign a document from within your DocuSign account, and on the subsequent page, select the check-box indicating you wish to withdraw your consent, or you may; ii. send us an e-mail to [email protected] and in the body of such request you must state your e-mail, full name, IS Postal Address, telephone number, and account number. We do not need any other information from you to withdraw consent.. The consequences of your withdrawing consent for online documents will be that transactions may take a longer time to process..
Required hardware and software
Operating Systems: Windows2000? or WindowsXP?
Browsers (for SENDERS): Internet Explorer 6.0? or above Browsers (for SIGNERS): Internet Explorer 6.0?, Mozilla FireFox 1.0, NetScape 7.2 (or above)
Email: Access to a valid email account
Screen Resolution: 800 x 600 minimum
Enabled Security Settings:
•Allow per session cookies
•Users accessing the internet behind a Proxy
Server must enable HTTP 1.1 settings via
proxy connection
** These minimum requirements are subject to change. If these requirements change, we will provide you with an email message at the email address we have on file for you at that time providing you with the revised hardware and software requirements, at which time you will have the right to withdraw your consent.
Acknowledging your access and consent to receive materials electronically To confirm to us that you can access this information electronically, which will be similar to other electronic notices and disclosures that we will provide to you, please verify that you were able to read this electronic disclosure and that you also were able to print on paper or electronically save this page for your future reference and access or that you were able to e-mail this disclosure and consent to an address where you will be able to print on paper or save it for your future reference and access. Further, if you consent to receiving notices and disclosures exclusively in electronic format on the terms and conditions described above, please let us know by clicking the 'I agree' button below.
By checking the 'I Agree' box, I confirm that:
• I can access and read this Electronic CONSENT TO E LECTRONIC RECEIPT OF ELECTRONIC CONSUMER DISCLOSURES document; and
• I can print on paper the disclosure or save or sen d the disclosure to a place where I can print it, for future reference and access; and
• Until or unless I notify City of Palo Alto as desc ribed above, I consent to receive from exclusively through electronic means all notices, disclosures, authorizations, acknowledgements, and other documents that are required to be provided or made available to me by City of Palo Alto during the course of my relationship with you.
APPENDICES | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW F INAL | MARCH 2022
Appendix D
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW DUAL
PLUMBING ORDINANCE
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | ABBREVIATIONS MARCH 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left Blank -
ARTICLE II. - PLUMBING CODE
SEC. 8.30. - 2016 California Plumbing Code.
SEC. 8.30.1. - 2016 California Plumbing Code adopted.
The California Plumbing Code, 2016 edition, first pr inting, including Appendices A, D and I, based on the 2015 Uniform Plumbing Code, promulgated by the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials Asso ciation, 4755 East Philad elphia Street, Ontario, California, 91761-2816, which regulates the erection, inst allation, alteration, repair , relocation, removal, repl acement, conversion, use and maintenance of plumbing, gas, drainage system s, and other similar work in order to provide minimum requirements and standards for the protection of the public health, safety and welfare; is adopted and by this refere nce made a part of this municipal code with the sa me force and effect as though set out herein in full. One (1) copy of the California Plumbing Code is on file for public inspection in the building inspection office.
(Ord. No. 11.13, § 9, 10/22/13; Ord. No. 17.16, § 1, 11/22/16.) SEC. 8.30.2. - Subsection 101.1 amended—Administration.
Subsection 101.1 of the California Plumbing Code is amended to read as follows:
101.1. Title. This document shall be known as the "California Plumbing Code" and may be cited as such and will be refer to herein as "this code." Admi nistrative provisions of the California Plumbing Code are referenced to the California Building Code, Chapter 1, Division II for provisions. (Ord. No. 11.13, § 9, 10/22/13; Ord. No. 17.16, § 1, 11/22/16.) SEC. 8.30.3. - Subsection 107.1 amended—Procedure for appeals.
Subsection 107.1 of the California Plumbing Code is added, to read as follows:
107.1 Procedure for appeals. The provisions of Section 8.10.18 of this code are hereby incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. When Section 8.10.18 is used in reference to a plumbing code appeal, the term "Plumbing Permit" shall replace the term "Building Permit" in said section. (Ord. No. 11.13, § 9, 10/22/13; Ord. No. 17.16, § 1, 11/22/16.) SEC. 8.30.4. - Subsection 1614.A.0 added—Nonpotable water reuse systems.
Subsection 16.14A.0 of the California Plum bing Code is added to read as follows:
Mountain View, CA Code of Ordinances
3/25/2019
a.
b.
c.
d.
1614A.0. Definitions.
Commercial building. For the purpose of this Ch apter 16A, a commercial building is defined as a building that is used for commerc ial purposes. It shall not include any building used for residential purposes, including, but no t limited to, hotels, motels , apartments, condominiums or similar buildings.
Dual plumbing system or dual plumbed. A system that utilizes separate piping systems for recycled water and potable water within a building, as defined by California Co de of Regulations, Title 22, Division
4. Floor trap priming. The practice of addi ng water to traps beneath floor drains to ensure a barrier from sewer gas.
Recycled Water. Nonpotable water that meet s California Department of Public Health statewide uniform criteria for disinfected tertia ry recycled water. Recycled water is also known as reclaimed water. (Ord. No. 17.16, § 1, 11/22/16.)
SEC. 8.30.5. - Subsection 1618.A.0 amended—Installation.
Subsection 16.18A.0 of the Ca lifornia Plumbing Code is am ended to read as follows:
1618A.0. Installation.
The recycled water piping system shall not include an y hose bibbs. Only quick couplers that differ from th ose used on the potable water system shall be used on the recycled water piping system.
The recycled water system and the potable wa ter system within th e building shall be provided with the required appurtenances (valves, air/vacuum relief valves, etc.) to allow for testing as required for cross connection test in Section 1620A.0.
Recycled water pipes laid in the same trench or crossing building sewer or drainage piping shall be installed in compliance with Sections 609.0 and 720.0 of this code.
Recycled water pipes shall be protec ted similar to potable water pipes.
All new commercial buildings or groups of new commercial buildings submitting for a building permit after January 1, 2017 in the city, where the tota l square footage of the building(s) is greater th an twenty-five thousand ( 25,000) square feet, shall incorporate dual plumbing in the design of the building to allow the use of recycled water, when it becomes available, for flushing toilets and urinals and priming floor traps.
Mountain View, CA Code of Ordinances
3/25/2019
(Ord. No. 17.16, § 1, 11/22/16.)
SECS. 8.31—8.39. - Reserved.
Mountain View, CA Code of Ordinances
3/25/2019
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | ABBREVIATIONS MARCH 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left Blank -
APPENDICES | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022
Appendix E
IRRIGATION ORDINANCE
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | ABBREVIATIONS MARCH 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left Blank -
a.
b.
ARTICLE V. - RECYCLED WATER FOR IRRIGATION
SEC. 35.100.1. - Findings.
Potable water is one of our most precious natural resources and is becoming increasingly scarce in the semiarid State of California. The use of treated, nonpotable water fo r construction and irrigation will increase the amount of potable wate r available for other uses in the ci ty. The City of Mountain View is dedicated to conserving the potabl e water supply. Recycled water is a sustainable water source that reduces potable water consumption an d is not subject to rationing duri ng drought. After careful study, the city council has determined that recycled water shall be used within the boundaries of the Shoreline Regional Park Community for irrigation purposes whenev er it is available and beneficial to the customer.
This article will implement an important program that will assi st the Shoreline Regional Park Community in preserving this prec ious commodity. In adopting this program, the council has balanced the needs of all water users and through this implemen tation strategy will allo w water users sufficient flexibility to meet their potabl e and nonpotable water needs. (Ord. No. 14.04, 12/26/04.)
SEC. 35.100.2. - Converting existing potable water users to recycled water.
Within the boundaries of the Shoreline Regional Park Community, retail, co mmercial and industrial customers to be served by recycled water in the init ial conversion have been identified in the "Regional Water Recycling Facilities Planning Study" dated Janu ary 2004. This study may be amended from time to time to add additional customers. Th ese customers will be notified by mail that a conversion to recycled water for irrigation purposes is required, along with the conditions of use, pricing and construction schedule. Recycled water customers may file a request for an exemption or adjustment from these requirements with the dire ctor of public works.
(Ord. No. 14.04, 12/26/04.)
SEC. 35.100.3. - Use of recycled water in new construction.
All applications for land use permits, building permits and other discretionary actions within the boundaries of the Shoreline Regional Park Community, filed after the ad option of this ordinance, shall include the following:
Incorporation of recycled water usage into the design of landscape and irrigation systems.
Consideration of plants suitable fo r irrigation with recycled water.
Mountain View, CA Code of Ordinances
3/25/2019
c.
d.
The installation of the infras tructure necessary to connect the irrigation system to the city's recycled water supply.
The use of recycled water in lieu of po table water during co nstruction activity.
The city maintains the right to re quire recycled water use for additional purposes as appropriate. (Ord. No. 14.04, 12/26/04.)
SEC. 35.100.4. - Exemptions and adjustments.
An application for an exemption or an adjustment to the requirement to use recycled water shall be made to the director of public works. Requests for an exemption or adjustment may be made consistent with state law and shall be based on the finding by the director that th e use of recycled water demonstrates an adverse effect to the applicant's landscaping installed prior to the effect ive date of the ordinance codified herein. The director of public works may also consider any additional factors, including any special costs or hardships which may be created by the use of re cycled water. A written determination will be made on all requests for exem ptions or adjustments within ten (10) business days and mailed to the applicant.
(Ord. No. 14.04, 12/26/04.)
SEC. 35.100.5. - Administrative provisions.
The director of public works shall establish wr itten application and appeals procedures and may promulgate guidelines for the im plementation of this program. (Ord. No. 14.04, 12/26/04.)
SEC. 35.100.6. - Appeals.
Denial of any application for an exemption and/or adjustment to the provis ions of recycled water use may be appealed to the city manager, whose decision shall be final. An application for appeal shall be filed with the city clerk in writ ing within ten (10) busi ness days after the director of public works' decision and shall state the specific grounds for the appeal. The city manager shall hear the appeal within sixty (60) calendar days after the appeal has be en filed with the city cler k and shall issue a written decision within thirty (30) days.
(Ord. No. 14.04, 12/26/04.)
SEC. 35.100.7. - Failure to comply with this article.
Mountain View, CA Code of Ordinances
3/25/2019
a.
b.
In addition to existing penalties in state and local la w for violation of the provis ions of this article, the director of public works may assess the following pe nalties, subject to the ap peal provisions set forth above:
A water service surcharge of fifty percent (50%) of the ge neral water service rate as set forth in Mountain View City Code Section 35.27 to use potable water for irrigation.
Continued use of potable water for irrigati on, after written warning or warnings by the director, may result in th e discontinuation of water serv ice supplied for irrigation by the City of Mountain View following a noticed hearing as set forth in Sec. 35.100.6.
A charge as set forth in the city's master fee schedule shall be paid prior to the reactivation or restorat ion of water service.
(Ord. No. 14.04, 12/26/04.)
Mountain View, CA Code of Ordinances
3/25/2019
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | ABBREVIATIONS MARCH 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left Blank -
APPENDICES | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022
Appendix F
EXISTING AND FUTURE RECYCLED WATER
USERS
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | ABBREVIATIONS MARCH 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left Blank -
Table F.1 - Existing (Alt 0) Recycled Water Demands
No. Account No. Meter No. Customer Name Address Model
Junction User Type Demands (afy)
1 9060-026000.00 09060771C Shoreline Amphitheatre/Live Na 1 Amphitheatre Pk 158 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 15.18 2 9060-019000.00 09060772 City Of M V 234410 1000 Crittenden Ln 194 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 13.28 3 9060-077000.00 08168593 Google Llc 1010 Joaquin Rd 468 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 8.74 4 9060-087000.00 08168594 Google Llc 1015 Joaquin Rd 456 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 4.56 5 9060-014000.00 08168577 Grubb & Ellis/Microsoft Field 1045 La Avenida Av 1085 444 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 22.12 6 9060-079000.00 08168598 Google Llc 1055 Joaquin Rd 126 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 10.85 7 9060-072000.00 08168602 Google Llc 1058 Huff Av 398 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 0.03 8 9060-017200.00 13107963 Google Llc 1200 Crittenden Ln 812 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 0.17 9 9060-013000.00 08168579 V T A 1235 La Avenida Av 442 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 2.83 10 9060-014100.00 14482013 Google Llc 1255 Pear Av 80 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 14.46 11 9060-017100.00 13054593 Google Llc 1300 Crittenden Ln 1500 812 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 17.40 12 9060-011000.00 08168600 Computer History Museum 1401 N Shoreline Bl 792 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 5.18 13 9060-032500.00 No Meter No. Associated with Account No. City Of M V 234256 1420 Charleston Rd A 644 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 0.10 14 9060-023000.00 09060767 Shoreline Amphitheatre/Live Na 1497 Terminal Bl 46 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 9.47 15 9060-078000.00 08168603 Google Llc 1500 Plymouth St 458 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 4.15 16 9060-052000.01 08168942 Google Llc 1500 Salado Dr A 368 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 0.07 17 9060-076000.00 08168589 Google Llc 1545 Charleston Rd 466 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 3.62 18 9060-073000.00 08169013 Google Llc 1550 Plymouth Av 746 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 7.49 19 9060-074000.00 08168596 Google Llc 1565 Charleston Rd 394 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 4.37 20 9060-075000.00 08169008 Google Llc 1585 Charleston Rd 14 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 11.33 21 9060-034000.00 08168937 Google Llc 1600 Amphitheatre Pk 452 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 5.19 21 9060-029000.00 08168943 Google Llc 1600 Amphitheatre Pk 452 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 10.96 21 9060-033000.00 08168930 Google Llc 1600 Amphitheatre Pk 452 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 13.18 21 9060-031000.00 08168582 City Of M V 235430 1600 Amphitheatre Pk 452 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 19.91 22 9060-656000.01 17975574 Google Llc 1625 Plymouth St A 130 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 10.81 23 9060-070000.00 08168587 City Of M V 234256 1661 Charleston Rd A 406 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 4.63 24 9060-083500.00 11133167 Google Llc 1764 N Shoreline Bl 100 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 1.26 25 9060-028000.00 08168586 City Of M V 234256 1780 Amphitheatre Pk 292 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 0.31 26 9060-082100.00 17042516 Google Inc Dba Google Llc 1804 N Shoreline Bl 932 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 1.27 27 9060-082000.00 08169011 Google Llc 1842 N Shoreline Bl 418 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 4.22 28 9060-026500.00 10257634 City Of M V 234410 1921 Amphitheatre Pk 292 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 5.72 29 9060-027000.00 08168941 Google Llc 1925 Amphitheatre Pk 1975 292 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 6.87 30 6080-256000.04 No Meter No. Associated with Account No. LINKEDIN CORPORATION 2025 STIERLIN CT 924 Irrigation 2.78 31 6080-258000.04 No Meter No. Associated with Account No. LINKEDIN CORP 2027 STIERLIN CT 924 Irrigation 2.90 32 6080-261000.03 No Meter No. Associated with Account No. BRITANNIA HACIENDA VIII LLC 2029 STIERLIN CT 924 Irrigation 5.40 33 6080-262000.05 No Meter No. Associated with Account No. BRITANNIA HACIENDA VIII LLC 2051 STIERLIN CT 924 Irrigation 7.18 34 6080-265000.04 No Meter No. Associated with Account No. LINKEDIN CORPORATION 2061 STIERLIN CT 924 Irrigation 8.29 35 6080-267000.05 No Meter No. Associated with Account No. BRITANNIA HACIENDA VIII LLC 2071 STIERLIN CT A 924 Irrigation 4.61 36 6080-270000.06 No Meter No. Associated with Account No. GOOGLE INC 2081 STIERLIN CT A 924 Irrigation 14.22 37 6080-275000.05 No Meter No. Associated with Account No. BRITANNIA HACIENDA VIII LLC 2091 STIERLIN CT 924 Irrigation 11.42 38 9060-019500.00 12309634 City Of M V 263038-55320 2195 N Shoreline Bl 654 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 0.99 39 9060-057000.00 08168932 City Of M V 234256 2299 Garcia Av 290 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 0.94 40 9060-020000.00 09060768 Shoreline Amphitheatre/Live N 2391 N Shoreline Bl 658 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 4.75 41 9060-037000.00 08170888 City Of M V 234256 2400 Garcia Av A 110 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 8.29 42 9060-037500.00 15143510 City Of M V 235400 2450 Garcia Av 672 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 4.70 43 9060-051000.00 08168935 Intuit Inc 2475 Garcia Av 2535 276 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 20.61 44 9060-038000.00 08168933 Intuit Inc 2500 Garcia Av 2550 450 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 9.94 45 9060-039000.00 08168936 City Of M V 234256 2535 Garcia Av A 276 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 1.11 46 9060-054000.01 180006506 Google Llc 2598 Bayshore Pk A 322 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 5.69 47 Future Account No Meter No. Associated with Account No. N/A 2600 MARINE WY 344 Dual Plumbed 5.00 47 9060-042200.00 16493667 Intuit Inc 2600 Marine Wy 344 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 8.86 48 9060-024000.00 09054835 41%239178/33%235400/26%225971 2612 N Shoreline Bl A 404 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 0.24 49 9060-091000.00 10249737 62%239178- 29%235400- 9%225971 2614 N Shoreline Bl 404 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 137.82 49 9060-092000.00 09062154A City Of M V 225570 2614 N Shoreline Bl A 404 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 4.62 50 9060-055050.00 180006505 Google Llc 2644 Bayshore Pk A 70 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 1.89 51 9060-049000.01 08168931 Caltrans D-4 (Mnvw) 2665 Bayshore Pk 270 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 0.07 52 9060-043000.01 09060775 Intuit Inc 2700 Coast Av 672 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 7.47 Table F.2 - Existing (Alt 1) Recycled Water Demands
No. Account No. Meter No. Customer Name Address Model
Junction Use Type Demands (afy)
3 6085-702000.0309060601Google Llc 1010 Joaquin Rd 468 Irrigation-Only 3.51 6 9070-686000.0509059302Google Llc 1055 Joaquin Rd 126 Dual Plumbed 6.58 10Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 1255 PEAR AV 80 Irrigation-Only 6.22 106080-059200.0114075005Google Llc 1255 Pear Av 80 Irrigation-Only 2.31 116080-277000.0209060516Google Inc 1300 Crittenden Ln 1500 812 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 29.00 149060-022000.0070031034DCity Of M V 234410 1497 Terminal Bl 46 Irrigation-Only 9.31 169070-671000.0408185233AGoogle Llc 1500 Salado Dr A 368 Irrigation-Only 12.66 179070-687000.0309060607Google Llc 1545 Charleston Rd 466 Irrigation-Only 2.33 196085-725000.0306388516AGoogle Llc 1565 Charleston Rd 394 Irrigation-Only 2.59 209070-688000.0508031132Google Llc 1585 Charleston Rd 14 Irrigation-Only 4.89 266080-322100.0015083987Google Inc Dba Google Llc 1804 N Shoreline Bl 932 Irrigation-Only 1.77 539070-641000.0907149002Google Inc 2011 Stierlin Ct 160 Irrigation-Only 7.71 549070-642000.0708186879Google Llc 2015 Stierlin Ct 926 Irrigation-Only 7.65 559070-643000.0608186869Google Llc 2017 Stierlin Ct 160 Irrigation-Only 3.88 559070-644000.0608185236Google Llc 2017 Stierlin Ct A 160 Irrigation-Only 14.28 569070-645000.0608186867Google Llc 2017 Stierlin Ct B 160 Irrigation-Only 14.05 379070-654000.0608172612Google Llc 2091 Stierlin Ct 160 Irrigation-Only 3.33 406080-286000.0208172604City Of M V 235400 2391 N Shoreline Bl 658 Irrigation-Only 1.64 439070-670000.0205088734AIntuit Inc 2475 Garcia Av 2535 276 Irrigation-Only 2.90 579070-668000.0209060594AIntuit Inc 2600 Casey Av 2650 352 Irrigation-Only 6.33 549030-509000.000816932262%239178- 29%235400- 9%2259712614 N Shoreline Bl 404 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 165.82 519060-049000.0008168931Caltrans D-4 (Mnvw) 2665 Bayshore Pk 270 Irrigation-Only 6.58 529070-666000.0112216203AIntuit Inc 2700 Coast Av 2750 672 Dual Plumbed 3.51 58Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 100 Huff Ave 152 Irrigation-Only 6.22 596080-033000.0007055474City Of M V 235450 1030 La Avenida Av J100 Dual Plumbed 1.23 60Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 1045 La Avienda St 444 Irrigation-Only 6.22 606080-032000.0007055469City Of M V 235450 1045 La Avenida Av 444 Irrigation-Only 1.32 619070-691000.0109060596Google Llc 1058 Huff Av A 398 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 2.03 619060-068000.0008168592Google Inc Dba Google Llc 1058 Huff Av Unit A 398 Irrigation-Only 18.74 626080-044100.0015962995Cross Over Health 1080 La Avenida Av 444 Irrigation-Only 1.37 636080-049000.0015171116Grubb & Ellis/Microsoft Field1090 La Avenida Av B 444 Irrigation-Only 2.08 649070-684000.0409056321Google Llc 1098 Alta Av 140 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 11.55 659060-018000.0009060774City Of M V 234410 1100 Crittenden Ln 194 Fire Sprinkler 2.30 666080-231000.01No Meter No. Associated with Account No.Google Inc 1200 Charleston Rd Unit 1210882 Irrigation-Only 6.72 669070-639000.0109060532Google Llc 1200 Charleston Rd 1210882 Irrigation-Only 4.82 676080-228100.0015196454AGoogle Llc 1201 Charleston Rd 880 Irrigation-Only 10.60 676080-282000.0008799754City Of M V 235450 1201 Crittenden Ln 812 Irrigation-Only 1.23 689070-637000.0309056286Google Llc 1215 Charleston Rd 938 Irrigation-Only 3.50 686080-206100.0015196450AGoogle Llc 1215 Charleston Rd 938 Fire Sprinkler 7.32 696080-232000.01No Meter No. Associated with Account No.Google Inc 1220 Charleston Rd Unit 1230882 Irrigation-Only 6.64 699070-640000.0109060525AGoogle Llc 1220 Charleston Rd 1230882 Irrigation-Only 7.02 709070-918000.0106599367ACaltrans D-4 Mnvw 1225 N Shoreline Bl 792 Irrigation-Only 1.57 709070-919000.0011013778Caltrans D-4 (Mnvw) 1225 N Shoreline Bl 792 Commercial 1.87 716080-209000.05No Meter No. Associated with Account No.Google Llc 1230 Shorebird Wy 938 Irrigation-Only 1.39 726080-235000.0008186871City Of M V 234256 1250 Charleston Rd 818 Irrigation-Only 1.22 726080-237100.0015196458AGoogle Llc 1250 Charleston Rd 818 Irrigation-Only 3.83 739070-631000.0208034403Pear Ave Group 1288 Pear Av A 440 Irrigation-Only 5.45 749070-638000.0309056287Google Llc 1295 Charleston Rd A 938 Irrigation-Only 5.90 756080-239100.0015196452Google Llc 1300 Charleston Rd 162 Irrigation-Only 4.44 769070-634000.0508031137Google Llc 1300 Spacepark Wy 936 Commercial 2.28 776080-211000.04No Meter No. Associated with Account No.Google Llc 1310 Shorebird Wy 936 Irrigation-Only 1.22 776080-211100.0014075163Google Llc 1310 Shorebird Wy 936 Irrigation-Only 8.46 789070-630000.01081728011325 Pear Av Associates Llc 1325 Pear Av 82 Irrigation-Only 4.41 796080-073000.0006171279ACity Of M V 234410 1335 La Avenida Av 80 Commercial 1.28 806080-203000.08No Meter No. Associated with Account No.Google Llc 1345 Shorebird Wy 880 Commercial 1.27 816080-213000.03No Meter No. Associated with Account No.Google Llc 1350 Shorebird Wy 936 Irrigation-Only 1.33 829070-636000.0508169889Google Llc 1355 Shorebird Wy 880 Irrigation-Only 3.15 836080-293200.0015196453Google Llc 1364 Charleston Rd 162 Irrigation-Only 5.73 849070-635000.0409056285Google Llc 1365 Shorebird Wy 880 Commercial 8.99 856080-198000.03No Meter No. Associated with Account No.Google Llc 1371 Shorebird Wy 1375 936 Irrigation-Only 5.66 869070-632000.0407141276Pear Av Investor Llc(Debtor In1380 Pear Av 1390 436 Commercial 3.81 876080-214000.04No Meter No. Associated with Account No.Google Llc 1380 Shorebird Wy 936 Irrigation-Only 2.66 876080-214100.0015196460AGoogle Llc 1380 Shorebird Wy 936 Commercial 2.27 886080-196000.03No Meter No. Associated with Account No.Accuray 1383 Shorebird Wy 936 Irrigation-Only 2.85 886080-196100.0015196447AGoogle Llc 1383 Shorebird Wy 936 Commercial 2.12 896080-216000.16No Meter No. Associated with Account No.23 And Me 1390 Shorebird Wy 934 Irrigation-Only 3.49 896080-216100.0015196449AGoogle Llc 1390 Shorebird Wy 934 Commercial 2.47 906080-194000.07No Meter No. Associated with Account No.Google Llc 1393 Shorebird Wy 1397 934 Irrigation-Only 3.93 906080-194100.0015956029AGoogle Llc 1393 Shorebird Wy 934 Irrigation-Only 2.99 916080-219100.0015196446Google Llc 1395 Charleston Rd 86 Irrigation-Only 4.75 926085-340000.0209060650City Of M V 234256 1400 Charleston Rd 58 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 1.22 929060-032000.0008169009City Of M V 234256 1400 Charleston Rd 58 Irrigation-Only 12.39 939070-694000.0109051937Google Llc 1489 Charleston Rd J88 Fire Sprinkler 2.22 946080-338000.01No Meter No. Associated with Account No.Century Theatres Inc #399 1500 N Shoreline Bl 66 Irrigation-Only 1.98 949070-658000.0108184251Century Theatres Inc #399 1500 N Shoreline Bl 66 Irrigation-Only 1.98 959070-672000.0309056328Google Llc 1501 Salado Dr 1505 370 Irrigation-Only 10.04 959070-676000.0209056330Google Llc 1501 Salado Dr A 370 Irrigation-Only 8.82 966080-305000.0105006667ACity Of M V 225971 1501 Terminal Bl 46 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 1.22 979060-089000.0008456208City Of M V 234747 1510 N Shoreline Bl A 178 Irrigation-Only 1.64 986080-332000.0408596950Google Llc 1600 N Shoreline Bl Rear/I56 Irrigation-Only 1.50 999070-690000.0609060591Google Llc 1600 Plymouth St 1670 474 Irrigation-Only 9.38 1006080-328000.0808169884Google Llc 1616 N Shoreline Bl 428 Irrigation-Only 3.75 1019070-693000.0709060600Google Llc 1625 Charleston Rd 150 Irrigation-Only 10.21 1029070-692000.0209056338American Century Investments1665 Charleston Rd 312 Irrigation-Only 8.83 1039070-657000.0108168630Google Llc 1708 N Shoreline Bl 426 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 2.80 1049060-084000.0008456247Hon Management Inc 1758 N Shoreline Bl R 422 Irrigation-Only 1.89 1056085-358000.0009060605City Of M V 225430 1778 Amphitheatre Pk 292 Irrigation-Only 1.23 1069070-682000.0209059312Google Llc 1801 Landings Dr 2199 32 Irrigation-Only 12.95 1079070-656000.0808172601Google Llc 1808 N Shoreline Bl 420 Irrigation-Only 4.08 1089070-683000.0209056333Google Llc 1861 Landings Dr 1871 302 Irrigation-Only 4.26 1099070-681000.0709060598Google Llc 1875 Charleston Rd 380 Irrigation-Only 5.43 1106080-317000.0808459763Google Llc 1890 N Shoreline Bl 410 Irrigation-Only 2.76 1119070-661000.0109060590Google Llc 1900 Charleston Rd 2000 38 Irrigation-Only 12.19 1119070-660000.0109056331Google Llc 1900 Charleston Rd 2000 38 Irrigation-Only 14.74 1116085-342595.00190484417Google Llc 1900 Charleston Rd A 38 Irrigation-Only 1.90 1129070-678000.0908031133Google Llc 1945 Charleston Rd 40 Irrigation-Only 8.77 1139070-679000.0709060655Google Llc 1965 Charleston Rd 40 Dual Plumbed 8.83 114Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 2000 N Shoreline Rd 448 Irrigation-Only 6.22 1159070-677000.1009056336Google Llc 2025 Garcia Av 370 Irrigation-Only 9.81 1165005-728000.0013544321ACaltrans D-4 (Mnvw) 2100 Charleston Rd 366 Irrigation-Only 1.23 1179070-680000.0208184258Google Llc 2171 Landings Dr 388 Irrigation-Only 3.02 1189070-633000.0208031139Tree Movers Inc 2190 Crittenden Ln 924 Irrigation-Only 8.16 1199070-673000.0209056327Google Llc 2400 Bayshore Pk 2450 336 Irrigation-Only 12.86 1206085-454000.0108031143Intuit Inc 2551 Casey Av 46 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 2.58 1219060-050000.0008168928Zoltan T Albert 2591 Garcia Av 274 Irrigation-Only 1.34 1229070-665000.0208799725AIntuit Inc 2593 Coast Av 362 Dual Plumbed 3.33 123Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 2601 Garcia Ave 70 Dual Plumbed 6.22 124Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 2601 Landings Dr 380 Irrigation-Only 6.22 1255005-723000.0008456248Harman Management Corp 2603 Charleston Rd 320 Irrigation-Only 4.65 1266085-418000.0108232899Google Inc Dba Google Llc 2665 Marine Wy 350 Irrigation-Only 2.00 1279070-667000.0308184255AIntuit Inc 2675 Coast Av 798 Irrigation-Only 7.81 1289070-664000.0108232892Google Inc Dba Google Llc 2685 Marine Wy 350 Irrigation-Only 2.20 1299070-669000.0409056320S F P M Llc 2700 Broderick Wy 352 Irrigation-Only 3.64 1306080-294000.0008172607City Of M V 225418 2920 N Shoreline Bl A 752 Irrigation-Only 2.37 1316080-289000.0108798715City Of M V 235400 3160 N Shoreline Bl A 752 Irrigation-Only 1.49 1329070-685000.0609056289Google Llc 900 Alta Av 316 Irrigation-Only (Non-Potable) 9.85 1329060-067000.0008168584Google Inc Dba Google Llc 900 Alta Av 316 Cooling 5.91 133Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.Charleston East N/A 934 Cooling 0.00 133Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.Bay View N/A 934 Cooling 23.17 133Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.NASA Research Park N/A 934 Indoor Residential 20.71 133Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.Charleston East N/A 934 Indoor Residential 0.00 133Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.Bay View N/A 934 Indoor Residential 14.70 133Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.NASA Research Park N/A 934 Irrigation 28.20 133Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.Charleston East N/A 934 Irrigation 0.00 133Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.Bay View N/A 934 Irrigation 8.75 133Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.WesCoat Housing N/A 934 Irrigation 19.24 133Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.NASA Research Park N/A 934 Irrigation 7.82 133Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.Ames Campus 1 N/A 934 Irrigation 62.43 133Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.Ames Campus 2 N/A 934 Irrigation 62.43 133Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.Army Reserve N/A 934 Irrigation 41.12 133Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.Parcel 5 N/A 934 27.46 Table F.3 - Existing (Alt 3) Recycled Water Demands
No. Account No. Meter No. Customer
Name Address Model Junction User Type Demands (afy)
134Future Account` N/A CLYDE AV J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 3.10 135Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A N SHORELINE BL J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.32 135Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A N SHORELINE BL J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.02 136Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A SAN VERON AV J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 1.34 137Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A SHORELINE BL J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.35 137Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A SHORELINE BL J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.45 138Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A W MIDDLEFIELD RD J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.36 139Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 1001 N SHORELINE BL J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 4.71 140Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 1100 W MAUDE AV J50 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 20.98 141Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 1212 TERRA BELLA AV J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 1.73 142Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 1215 TERRA BELLA AV J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 1.08 143Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 1274 TERRA BELLA AV J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 4.23 144Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 1275 LA AVENIDA J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 6.82 145Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 1400 SHORELINE BL J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 4.07 146Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 189 N Bernardo Ave 776 Dual Plumbed 5.00 147Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 201 RAVENDALE DR 922 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 15.32 148Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 205 RAVENDALE DR 922 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 9.27 149Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 280 N BERNARDO AV 848 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 17.29 149Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 280 N BERNARDO AV 848 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 15.96 150Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 302 EASY ST J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 2.16 151Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 303 RAVENDALE DR J64 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 17.88 152Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 313 FAIRCHILD DR J38 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 31.40 153Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 339 M Whisman Rd 840 Dual Plumbed 5.00 154Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 339 N BERNARDO AV 848 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 65.11 155Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 345 RAVENDALE DR J64 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 19.89 156Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 350 ELLIS ST 840 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 47.10 157Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 350 N BERNARDO AV 848 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 16.59 158Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 405 NATIONAL AV J42 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 9.86 159Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 411 CLYDE AV J50 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 3.79 160Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 411 NATIONAL AV J44 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 4.29 161Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 415 CLYDE AV J50 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 3.97 162Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 420 CLYDE AV J50 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 4.31 163Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 420 N BERNARDO AV 846 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 9.74 164Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 425 CLYDE AV J50 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 3.88 165Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 433 CLYDE AV J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 4.99 166Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 440 MOFFETT BL J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 6.32 167Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 440 N BERNARDO AV 846 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 8.80 168Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 441 CLYDE AV J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 4.10 169Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 450 NATIONAL AV J42 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 9.28 170Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 453 RAVENDALE DR J64 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 8.28 171Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 455 N BERNARDO AV 846 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 47.53 172Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 455 NATIONAL AV J40 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 4.42 173Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 464 ELLIS ST 840 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 40.03 174Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 465 FAIRCHILD DR 868 Dual Plumbed 5.00 174Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 465 FAIRCHILD DR J44 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 14.66 175Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 480 ELLIS ST J40 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 4.35 176Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 485 CLYDE AV J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 9.68 177Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 495 CLYDE AV J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 6.01 178Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 500 ELLIS ST 868 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 5.16 179Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 501 ELLIS ST J40 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 8.17 180Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 515 ELLIS ST J40 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 8.42 181Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 550 ELLIS ST 868 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 3.85 182Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 555 CLYDE AV STE 120 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.15 183Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 555 CLYDE AV STE 160 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.17 184Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 555 E MIDDLEFIELD RD J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 9.52 185Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 555A ELLIS ST 868 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 8.33 186Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 559 CLYDE AV STE 200 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.16 187Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 559 CLYDE AV STE 220 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.16 188Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 559 CLYDE AV STE 240 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.15 189Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 559 CLYDE AV STE 260 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.15 190Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 565 CLYDE AV STE 600 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.09 191Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 565 CLYDE AV STE 610 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.09 192Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 565 CLYDE AV STE 620 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.12 193Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 565 CLYDE AV STE 630 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.12 194Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 565 CLYDE AV STE 640 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.10 195Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 565 CLYDE AV STE 650 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.10 196Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 565 CLYDE AV STE 660 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.10 197Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 565 CLYDE AV STE 670 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.10 198Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 569 CLYDE AV STE 500 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.09 199Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 569 CLYDE AV STE 510 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.09 200Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 569 CLYDE AV STE 520 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.08 201Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 569 CLYDE AV STE 530 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.08 202Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 569 CLYDE AV STE 540 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.09 203Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 569 CLYDE AV STE 550 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.09 204Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 569 CLYDE AV STE 560 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.09 205Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 569 CLYDE AV STE 570 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.09 206Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 575 CLYDE AV STE 400 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.16 207Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 575 CLYDE AV STE 420 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.16 208Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 575 CLYDE AV STE 440 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.15 209Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 575 CLYDE AV STE 460 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.15 210Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 579 CLYDE AV STE 300 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.16 211Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 579 CLYDE AV STE 320 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.16 212Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 579 CLYDE AV STE 340 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.15 213Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 579 CLYDE AV STE 360 J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.15 214Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 580 CLYDE AV 790 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 21.65 215Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 599 FAIRCHILD DR J46 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 4.79 216Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 605 ELLIS ST 868 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 4.86 217Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 605 FAIRCHILD DR 838 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 14.75 218Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 615 NATIONAL AV J42 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 5.30 219Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 625 CLYDE AV 790 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 19.62 220Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 625 NATIONAL AV J42 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 2.31 221Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 630 CLYDE AV 790 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 9.47 222Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 636 ELLIS ST J46 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 2.59 223Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 640 CLYDE CT J52 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 9.85 224Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 640 NATIONAL AV J42 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 20.14 225Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 644 NATIONAL AV J44 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 21.67 226Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 645 NATIONAL AV J44 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 5.02 227Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 650 CLYDE CT 838 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 10.04 228Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 665 CLYDE AV 838 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 17.33 229Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 690 E MIDDLEFIELD RD J68 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 67.75 230Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 700 E MIDDLEFIELD RD 844 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 75.04 231Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 700 Middlefield Rd 844 Dual Plumbed 5.00 232Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 701 E MIDDLEFIELD RD 842 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 12.15 233Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 755 RAVENDALE DR 846 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 8.36 234Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 777 E MIDDLEFIELD RD 844 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 16.59 235Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 800 E MIDDLEFIELD RD 844 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 18.38 236Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 807 N SHORELINE BL J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.41 237Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 808 N SHORELINE BL J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.53 238Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 841 SAN VERON AV J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 1.70 239Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 850 N SHORELINE BL J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 1.16 240Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 869 LINDA VISTA AV J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.12 241Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 880 MAUDE AV J50 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 5.89 242Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 885 MAUDE AV J50 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 4.28 243Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 891 MAUDE AV J50 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 3.28 244Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 905 W MIDDLEFIELD RD 901J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.02 245Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 905 W MIDDLEFIELD RD 902J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.02 246Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 905 W MIDDLEFIELD RD 903J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.02 247Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 905 W MIDDLEFIELD RD 904J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.02 248Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 905 W MIDDLEFIELD RD 913J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.02 249Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 905 W MIDDLEFIELD RD 914J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.02 250Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 905 W MIDDLEFIELD RD 915J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.01 251Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 905 W MIDDLEFIELD RD 916J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.01 252Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 905 W MIDDLEFIELD RD 917J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.02 253Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 905 W MIDDLEFIELD RD 918J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.02 254Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 917 N SHORELINE BL J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.49 255Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 967 N SHORELINE BL J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.88 256Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A 975 N SHORELINE BL J1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.26 257Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A Parcel without address in GIS 760 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 35.05 257Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A Parcel without address in GIS J48 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 8.70 257Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A Parcel without address in GIS J46 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 1.52 257Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A Parcel without address in GISJ1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 1.10 257Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A Parcel without address in GIS 842 Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 3.73 257Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A Parcel without address in GISJ1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.44 257Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A Parcel without address in GISJ1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.99 257Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A Parcel without address in GISJ1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 1.40 257Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A Parcel without address in GISJ1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.15 257Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A Parcel without address in GISJ1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 0.04 257Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A Parcel without address in GISJ1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 1.29 257Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A Parcel without address in GISJ1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 2.49 257Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A Parcel without address in GISJ1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 1.85 257Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A Parcel without address in GISJ1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 1.31 257Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A Parcel without address in GISJ1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 3.21 257Future AccountNo Meter No. Associated with Account No.N/A Parcel without address in GISJ1306/J104/J76/770Irrigation/Indoor Recycled Use 1.45
APPENDICES | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022
Appendix G
RECOM MENDED PROJECT CAP ITAL COSTS AND
CASH FLOW
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | ABBREVIATIONS MARCH 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left Blank -
Table G.2 - Cashflow Assumptions
CASH FLOW ASSUMPTIONS VALUES
2022 Beginning Fund Balance $0
O&M Projection (% of Capital) 2.0%
O&M Inflation Escalator 3.0%
Capital - Recycled Water System & Expansion 65,000
Capital - Recycled Water System & Expansion Inflation Escalator 2.0% Interest Income 1.5%
Acre-Feet to Cubic Feet 43,560
Issue Debt Yes
Sites for Conversion 81
Scenario 1 - 3 sites per Year 27
Scenario 2 - 6 sites per Year 14
Scenario 3 - 8 sites per Year 11
DEBT INSTRUMENTS AND RATES
Revenue Bond 4.0%
SRF Loan 1.5%
Tier 2 $7.01
5/8" Meter Charge $15.55
Recycled Water Rate per CCF $5.00
Table G.3 - Scenario 1 (27-Year Cash Flow) FYE 2022 FYE 2023 FYE 2024 FYE 2025 FYE 2026 FYE 2027 FYE 2028 FYE 2029 FYE 2030 FYE 2031 FYE 2032 Annual Recycled Water Customers 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Cumulative Recycled Water Customers 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 Annual Recycled Water Demand (CCF) 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 Cumulative Recycled Water Demand (CCF) 17,381 34,763 52,144 69,526 86,907 104,289 121,670 139,052 156,433 173,815 191,196 Beginning Fund Balance $0 $1,843,618 $896,375 $56,417 $2,041,627 $1,292,160 $652,815 $1,169,655 $705,521 $355,655 $121,720 Revenues
Recycled Water Meter Charges $560 $1,120 $1,679 $2,239 $2,799 $3,359 $3,919 $4,478 $5,038 $5,598 $6,158 Recycled Water Sales (Consumption) 86,907 173,815 260,722 347,629 434,537 521,444 608,351 695,259 782,166 869,073 955,981 Avoided Cost (Potable - Recycled) 34,937 69,873 104,810 139,747 174,684 209,620 244,557 279,494 314,431 349,367 384,304 Interest Income (Excludes Bond Proceeds) 0 20,397 7,093 0 24,817 14,479 5,304 13,959 7,900 3,554 946 Bond Proceeds 2,880,000 0 0 2,880,000 0 0 1,110,000 0 0 0 0 Total Revenues $3,002,404 $265,205 $374,304 $3,369,616 $636,837 $748,902 $1,972,131 $993,190 $1,109,534 $1,227,592 $1,347,389 Expenses
Operations & Maintenance Cost $15,846 $16,322 $16,811 $17,316 $17,835 $18,370 $18,921 $19,489 $20,073 $20,676 $21,296 Capital Costs - Alt1 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 Capital Costs - Recycled Water & Expansion Improvements 65,000 66,300 67,626 68,979 70,358 71,765 73,201 74,665 76,158 77,681 79,235 Debt Service 116,400 168,286 168,286 336,571 336,571 336,571 401,630 401,630 401,630 401,630 401,630 Total Expenses $1,158,786 $1,212,447 $1,214,263 $1,384,405 $1,386,304 $1,388,246 $1,455,292 $1,457,323 $1,459,401 $1,461,527 $1,463,701 Surplus / (Deficit) $1,843,618 ($947,242) ($839,958) $1,985,210 ($749,468) ($639,344) $516,839 ($464,133) ($349,867) ($233,934) ($116,312) Ending Fund Balance $1,843,618 $896,375 $56,417 $2,041,627 $1,292,160 $652,815 $1,169,655 $705,521 $355,655 $121,720 $5,409 Debt Service Coverage Ratio 25.66x 1.48x 2.12x 9.96x 1.84x 2.17x 4.86x 2.42x 2.71x 3.01x 3.30x Cashflow-27year
Table G.3 - Scenario 1 (27-Year Cash Flow)
Annual Recycled Water Customers
Cumulative Recycled Water Customers
Annual Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Cumulative Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Beginning Fund Balance
Revenues
Recycled Water Meter Charges
Recycled Water Sales (Consumption)
Avoided Cost (Potable - Recycled)
Interest Income (Excludes Bond Proceeds)
Bond Proceeds
Total Revenues
Expenses
Operations & Maintenance Cost
Capital Costs - Alt1
Capital Costs - Recycled Water & Expansion Improvements Debt Service
Total Expenses
Surplus / (Deficit)
Ending Fund Balance
Debt Service Coverage Ratio
FYE 2033 FYE 2034 FYE 2035 FYE 2036 FYE 2037 FYE 2038 FYE 2039 FYE 2040 FYE 2041 FYE 2042 FYE 2043 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
36 39 42 45 48 51 54 57 60 63 66
17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 208,578 225,959 243,341 260,722 278,103 295,485 312,866 330,248 347,629 365,011 382,392 $5,409 $8,434 $132,536 $379,476 $751,045 $1,249,057 $1,875,352 $2,631,797 $3,520,285 $4,542,736 $5,701,098 $6,718 $7,277 $7,837 $8,397 $8,957 $9,517 $10,076 $10,636 $11,196 $11,756 $12,316 1,042,888 1,129,795 1,216,703 1,303,610 1,390,517 1,477,425 1,564,332 1,651,239 1,738,147 1,825,054 1,911,961 419,241 454,178 489,114 524,051 558,988 593,925 628,861 663,798 698,735 733,672 768,608 103 1,049 3,812 8,416 14,889 23,259 33,552 45,797 60,022 76,257 94,529 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$1,468,950 $1,592,300 $1,717,466 $1,844,474 $1,973,351 $2,104,125 $2,236,822 $2,371,471 $2,508,100 $2,646,738 $2,787,415 $21,935 $22,593 $23,271 $23,969 $24,688 $25,428 $26,191 $26,977 $27,786 $28,620 $29,479 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 80,819 82,436 84,084 85,766 87,481 89,231 91,016 92,836 94,693 96,587 98,518 401,630 401,630 401,630 401,630 401,630 401,630 401,630 401,630 401,630 401,630 401,630 $1,465,924 $1,468,199 $1,470,525 $1,472,905 $1,475,339 $1,477,830 $1,480,377 $1,482,983 $1,485,649 $1,488,377 $1,491,167 $3,025 $124,101 $246,941 $371,569 $498,012 $626,295 $756,445 $888,488 $1,022,451 $1,158,362 $1,296,248 $8,434 $132,536 $379,476 $751,045 $1,249,057 $1,875,352 $2,631,797 $3,520,285 $4,542,736 $5,701,098 $6,997,345
3.60x 3.91x 4.22x 4.53x 4.85x 5.18x 5.50x 5.84x 6.18x 6.52x 6.87x Cashflow-27year
Table G.3 - Scenario 1 (27-Year Cash Flow)
Annual Recycled Water Customers
Cumulative Recycled Water Customers
Annual Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Cumulative Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Beginning Fund Balance
Revenues
Recycled Water Meter Charges
Recycled Water Sales (Consumption)
Avoided Cost (Potable - Recycled)
Interest Income (Excludes Bond Proceeds)
Bond Proceeds
Total Revenues
Expenses
Operations & Maintenance Cost
Capital Costs - Alt1
Capital Costs - Recycled Water & Expansion Improvements Debt Service
Total Expenses
Surplus / (Deficit)
Ending Fund Balance
Debt Service Coverage Ratio
FYE 2044 FYE 2045 FYE 2046 FYE 2047 FYE 2048 FYE 2049 FYE 2050 FYE 2051 FYE 2052 FYE 2053 FYE 2054 3 3 3 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
69 72 75 78 81 81 81 81 81 81 81
17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 399,774 417,155 434,537 451,918 469,300 486,681 504,063 521,444 538,825 556,207 573,588 $6,997,345 $8,433,483 $10,011,541 $11,733,582 $13,601,695 $15,618,001 $17,784,084 $20,102,116 $22,574,301 $25,202,872 $28,159,643 $12,875 $13,435 $13,995 $14,555 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 1,998,869 2,085,776 2,172,683 2,259,591 2,346,498 2,433,405 2,520,313 2,607,220 2,694,127 2,781,035 2,867,942 803,545 838,482 873,419 908,355 943,292 978,229 1,013,166 1,048,102 1,083,039 1,117,976 1,152,913 114,870 137,308 161,874 188,600 217,516 248,651 282,031 317,690 355,661 397,240 442,478 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$2,930,159 $3,075,001 $3,221,971 $3,371,101 $3,522,421 $3,675,400 $3,830,624 $3,988,127 $4,147,942 $4,311,365 $4,478,447 $30,363 $31,274 $32,212 $33,178 $34,174 $35,199 $36,255 $37,343 $38,463 $39,617 $40,805 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 100,489 102,498 104,548 106,639 108,772 110,948 113,167 115,430 117,739 120,093 122,495 401,630 401,630 401,630 401,630 401,630 401,630 401,630 401,630 401,630 233,344 233,344 $1,494,022 $1,496,942 $1,499,930 $1,502,988 $1,506,116 $1,509,317 $1,512,591 $1,515,942 $1,519,371 $1,354,594 $1,358,185 $1,436,137 $1,578,059 $1,722,041 $1,868,113 $2,016,305 $2,166,083 $2,318,033 $2,472,185 $2,628,571 $2,956,770 $3,120,262 $8,433,483 $10,011,541 $11,733,582 $13,601,695 $15,618,001 $17,784,084 $20,102,116 $22,574,301 $25,202,872 $28,159,643 $31,279,905
7.22x 7.58x 7.94x 8.31x 8.69x 9.06x 9.45x 9.84x 10.23x 18.31x 19.02x Cashflow-27year
Table G.3 - Scenario 1 (27-Year Cash Flow)
Annual Recycled Water Customers
Cumulative Recycled Water Customers
Annual Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Cumulative Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Beginning Fund Balance
Revenues
Recycled Water Meter Charges
Recycled Water Sales (Consumption)
Avoided Cost (Potable - Recycled)
Interest Income (Excludes Bond Proceeds)
Bond Proceeds
Total Revenues
Expenses
Operations & Maintenance Cost
Capital Costs - Alt1
Capital Costs - Recycled Water & Expansion Improvements Debt Service
Total Expenses
Surplus / (Deficit)
Ending Fund Balance
Debt Service Coverage Ratio
FYE 2055 FYE 2056 FYE 2057 FYE 2058 FYE 2059 FYE 2060 FYE 2061 FYE 2062 FYE 2063 FYE 2064 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81
17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 590,970 608,351 625,733 643,114 660,496 677,877 695,259 712,640 730,022 747,403 $31,279,905 $34,735,575 $38,362,051 $42,161,805 $46,202,893 $50,423,295 $54,825,606 $59,412,458 $64,186,518 $69,150,492 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 2,954,849 3,041,757 3,128,664 3,215,571 3,302,479 3,389,386 3,476,293 3,563,201 3,650,108 3,737,015 1,187,849 1,222,786 1,257,723 1,292,660 1,327,596 1,362,533 1,397,470 1,432,407 1,467,343 1,502,280 491,430 544,151 599,433 657,802 719,302 783,491 850,407 920,092 992,583 1,067,923 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$4,649,244 $4,823,808 $5,000,935 $5,181,147 $5,364,491 $5,550,524 $5,739,285 $5,930,813 $6,125,149 $6,322,333 $42,029 $43,290 $44,589 $45,927 $47,304 $48,724 $50,185 $51,691 $53,242 $54,839 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 124,945 127,444 129,993 132,593 135,245 137,949 140,708 143,523 146,393 149,321 65,059 65,059 65,059 (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0)
$1,193,573 $1,197,333 $1,201,181 $1,140,059 $1,144,089 $1,148,213 $1,152,434 $1,156,753 $1,161,175 $1,165,700 $3,455,670 $3,626,475 $3,799,754 $4,041,088 $4,220,402 $4,402,311 $4,586,852 $4,774,060 $4,963,975 $5,156,633 $34,735,575 $38,362,051 $42,161,805 $46,202,893 $50,423,295 $54,825,606 $59,412,458 $64,186,518 $69,150,492 $74,307,125
70.82x 73.48x 76.18x N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cashflow-27year
Table G.4 - Scenario 2 (14-Year Cash Flow) FYE 2022 FYE 2023 FYE 2024 FYE 2025 FYE 2026 FYE 2027 FYE 2028 FYE 2029 FYE 2030 FYE 2031 FYE 2032 Annual Recycled Water Customers 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
Cumulative Recycled Water Customers 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 Annual Recycled Water Demand (CCF) 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 Cumulative Recycled Water Demand (CCF) 33,521 67,043 100,564 134,086 167,607 201,128 234,650 268,171 301,693 335,214 368,735 Beginning Fund Balance $0 $3,621,346 $1,857,157 $302,093 $4,199,730 $2,823,371 $1,661,785 $1,734,335 $963,271 $415,875 $95,439 Revenues
Recycled Water Meter Charges $1,120 $2,239 $3,359 $4,478 $5,598 $6,718 $7,837 $8,957 $10,076 $11,196 $12,316 Recycled Water Sales (Consumption) 167,607 335,214 502,821 670,428 838,035 1,005,642 1,173,249 1,340,856 1,508,463 1,676,070 1,843,677 Avoided Cost (Potable - Recycled) 67,378 134,756 202,134 269,512 336,890 404,268 471,646 539,024 606,402 673,780 741,158 Interest Income (Excludes Bond Proceeds) 0 40,783 16,074 0 52,281 33,388 17,242 20,081 10,267 3,806 750 Bond Proceeds 5,560,000 0 0 5,560,000 0 0 1,080,000 0 0 0 0 Total Revenues $5,796,105 $512,992 $724,388 $6,504,418 $1,232,804 $1,450,016 $2,749,974 $1,908,918 $2,135,208 $2,364,852 $2,597,901 Expenses
Operations & Maintenance Cost $30,560 $31,477 $32,422 $33,394 $34,396 $35,428 $36,491 $37,586 $38,713 $39,875 $41,071 Capital Costs - Alt1 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 Capital Costs - Recycled Water & Expansion Improvements 65,000 66,300 67,626 68,979 70,358 71,765 73,201 74,665 76,158 77,681 79,235 Debt Service 224,800 325,005 325,005 650,010 650,010 650,010 713,334 713,334 713,334 713,334 713,334 Total Expenses $2,174,759 $2,277,181 $2,279,451 $2,606,782 $2,609,163 $2,611,602 $2,677,424 $2,679,983 $2,682,604 $2,685,288 $2,688,038 Surplus / (Deficit) $3,621,346 ($1,764,189) ($1,555,064) $3,897,637 ($1,376,359) ($1,161,586) $72,550 ($771,065) ($547,396) ($320,436) ($90,137) Ending Fund Balance $3,621,346 $1,857,157 $302,093 $4,199,730 $2,823,371 $1,661,785 $1,734,335 $963,271 $415,875 $95,439 $5,302 Debt Service Coverage Ratio 25.65x 1.48x 2.13x 9.96x 1.84x 2.18x 3.80x 2.62x 2.94x 3.26x 3.58x Cashflow-14year
Table G.4 - Scenario 2 (14-Year Cash Flow)
Annual Recycled Water Customers
Cumulative Recycled Water Customers
Annual Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Cumulative Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Beginning Fund Balance
Revenues
Recycled Water Meter Charges
Recycled Water Sales (Consumption)
Avoided Cost (Potable - Recycled)
Interest Income (Excludes Bond Proceeds)
Bond Proceeds
Total Revenues
Expenses
Operations & Maintenance Cost
Capital Costs - Alt1
Capital Costs - Recycled Water & Expansion Improvements Debt Service
Total Expenses
Surplus / (Deficit)
Ending Fund Balance
Debt Service Coverage Ratio
FYE 2033 FYE 2034 FYE 2035 FYE 2036 FYE 2037 FYE 2038 FYE 2039 FYE 2040 FYE 2041 FYE 2042 FYE 2043 6 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
72 78 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81
33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 402,257 435,778 469,300 502,821 536,342 569,864 603,385 636,907 670,428 703,949 737,471 $5,302 $148,850 $529,519 $1,150,232 $2,013,952 $3,124,250 $4,484,748 $6,099,120 $7,971,095 $10,104,454 $12,503,033 $13,435 $14,555 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 2,011,284 2,178,891 2,346,498 2,514,105 2,681,712 2,849,319 3,016,926 3,184,533 3,352,140 3,519,747 3,687,354 808,536 875,914 943,292 1,010,670 1,078,048 1,145,426 1,212,804 1,280,182 1,347,560 1,414,938 1,482,316 1,148 5,050 12,504 23,555 38,250 56,643 78,788 104,741 134,557 168,294 206,008 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$2,834,403 $3,074,410 $3,317,409 $3,563,444 $3,813,124 $4,066,502 $4,323,633 $4,584,571 $4,849,372 $5,118,094 $5,390,793 $42,303 $43,572 $44,879 $46,225 $47,612 $49,041 $50,512 $52,027 $53,588 $55,196 $56,852 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 80,819 82,436 84,084 85,766 87,481 89,231 91,016 92,836 94,693 96,587 98,518 713,334 713,334 713,334 713,334 713,334 713,334 713,334 713,334 713,334 713,334 713,334 $2,690,855 $2,693,740 $2,696,696 $2,699,724 $2,702,826 $2,706,004 $2,709,260 $2,712,596 $2,716,013 $2,719,515 $2,723,103 $143,548 $380,669 $620,713 $863,720 $1,110,298 $1,360,498 $1,614,373 $1,871,975 $2,133,359 $2,398,579 $2,667,690 $148,850 $529,519 $1,150,232 $2,013,952 $3,124,250 $4,484,748 $6,099,120 $7,971,095 $10,104,454 $12,503,033 $15,170,723
3.91x 4.25x 4.59x 4.93x 5.28x 5.63x 5.99x 6.35x 6.72x 7.10x 7.48x Cashflow-14year
Table G.4 - Scenario 2 (14-Year Cash Flow)
Annual Recycled Water Customers
Cumulative Recycled Water Customers
Annual Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Cumulative Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Beginning Fund Balance
Revenues
Recycled Water Meter Charges
Recycled Water Sales (Consumption)
Avoided Cost (Potable - Recycled)
Interest Income (Excludes Bond Proceeds)
Bond Proceeds
Total Revenues
Expenses
Operations & Maintenance Cost
Capital Costs - Alt1
Capital Costs - Recycled Water & Expansion Improvements Debt Service
Total Expenses
Surplus / (Deficit)
Ending Fund Balance
Debt Service Coverage Ratio
FYE 2044 FYE 2045 FYE 2046 FYE 2047 FYE 2048 FYE 2049 FYE 2050 FYE 2051 FYE 2052 FYE 2053 FYE 2054 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81
33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 770,992 804,514 838,035 871,556 905,078 938,599 972,121 1,005,642 1,039,163 1,072,685 1,106,206 $15,170,723 $18,111,473 $21,329,286 $24,828,226 $28,612,413 $32,686,027 $37,053,309 $41,718,561 $46,686,144 $51,960,487 $57,873,520 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 3,854,961 4,022,568 4,190,175 4,357,782 4,525,389 4,692,996 4,860,603 5,028,210 5,195,817 5,363,424 5,531,031 1,549,694 1,617,072 1,684,450 1,751,828 1,819,206 1,886,584 1,953,962 2,021,340 2,088,718 2,156,096 2,223,474 247,758 293,604 343,604 397,821 456,316 519,151 586,391 658,100 734,342 817,623 908,046 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$5,667,528 $5,948,358 $6,233,344 $6,522,546 $6,816,026 $7,113,846 $7,416,071 $7,722,764 $8,033,992 $8,352,258 $8,677,665 $58,557 $60,314 $62,123 $63,987 $65,906 $67,884 $69,920 $72,018 $74,178 $76,404 $78,696 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 100,489 102,498 104,548 106,639 108,772 110,948 113,167 115,430 117,739 120,093 122,495 713,334 713,334 713,334 713,334 713,334 713,334 713,334 713,334 713,334 388,329 388,329 $2,726,778 $2,730,545 $2,734,404 $2,738,359 $2,742,411 $2,746,564 $2,750,819 $2,755,180 $2,759,650 $2,439,224 $2,443,918 $2,940,750 $3,217,813 $3,498,940 $3,784,187 $4,073,614 $4,367,282 $4,665,251 $4,967,584 $5,274,342 $5,913,033 $6,233,747 $18,111,473 $21,329,286 $24,828,226 $28,612,413 $32,686,027 $37,053,309 $41,718,561 $46,686,144 $51,960,487 $57,873,520 $64,107,267
7.86x 8.25x 8.65x 9.05x 9.46x 9.88x 10.30x 10.73x 11.16x 21.31x 22.14x Cashflow-14year
Table G.4 - Scenario 2 (14-Year Cash Flow)
Annual Recycled Water Customers
Cumulative Recycled Water Customers
Annual Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Cumulative Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Beginning Fund Balance
Revenues
Recycled Water Meter Charges
Recycled Water Sales (Consumption)
Avoided Cost (Potable - Recycled)
Interest Income (Excludes Bond Proceeds)
Bond Proceeds
Total Revenues
Expenses
Operations & Maintenance Cost
Capital Costs - Alt1
Capital Costs - Recycled Water & Expansion Improvements Debt Service
Total Expenses
Surplus / (Deficit)
Ending Fund Balance
Debt Service Coverage Ratio
FYE 2055 FYE 2056 FYE 2057 FYE 2058 FYE 2059 FYE 2060 FYE 2061 FYE 2062 FYE 2063 FYE 2064 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81
33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 1,139,728 1,173,249 1,206,770 1,240,292 1,273,813 1,307,335 1,340,856 1,374,377 1,407,899 1,441,420 $64,107,267 $70,993,863 $78,215,538 $85,777,195 $93,747,603 $102,068,967 $110,746,416 $119,785,154 $129,190,459 $138,967,687 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 5,698,638 5,866,245 6,033,852 6,201,459 6,369,066 6,536,673 6,704,280 6,871,887 7,039,494 7,207,101 2,290,852 2,358,230 2,425,608 2,492,986 2,560,364 2,627,742 2,695,120 2,762,498 2,829,876 2,897,255 1,005,716 1,110,740 1,220,790 1,336,413 1,457,692 1,584,234 1,716,116 1,853,416 1,996,214 2,144,590 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$9,010,320 $9,350,330 $9,695,364 $10,045,973 $10,402,236 $10,763,763 $11,130,631 $11,502,916 $11,880,699 $12,264,060 $81,057 $83,488 $85,993 $88,573 $91,230 $93,967 $96,786 $99,689 $102,680 $105,761 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 124,945 127,444 129,993 132,593 135,245 137,949 140,708 143,523 146,393 149,321 63,324 63,324 63,324 (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0)
$2,123,724 $2,128,655 $2,133,708 $2,075,564 $2,080,873 $2,086,315 $2,091,893 $2,097,610 $2,103,472 $2,109,480 $6,886,596 $7,221,675 $7,561,656 $7,970,409 $8,321,363 $8,677,449 $9,038,738 $9,405,306 $9,777,228 $10,154,580 $70,993,863 $78,215,538 $85,777,195 $93,747,603 $102,068,967 $110,746,416 $119,785,154 $129,190,459 $138,967,687 $149,122,267 141.01x 146.34x 151.75x N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cashflow-14year
Table G.5 - Scenario 3 (11-Year Cash Flow) FYE 2022 FYE 2023 FYE 2024 FYE 2025 FYE 2026 FYE 2027 FYE 2028 FYE 2029 FYE 2030 FYE 2031 FYE 2032 Annual Recycled Water Customers 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 1
Cumulative Recycled Water Customers 8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72 80 81 Annual Recycled Water Demand (CCF) 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 Cumulative Recycled Water Demand (CCF) 42,664 85,327 127,991 170,654 213,318 255,982 298,645 341,309 383,972 426,636 469,300 Beginning Fund Balance $0 $4,630,326 $2,403,537 $443,618 $5,426,704 $3,695,608 $2,238,623 $2,052,452 $1,108,428 $450,112 $81,716 Revenues
Recycled Water Meter Charges $1,493 $2,986 $4,478 $5,971 $7,464 $8,957 $10,450 $11,942 $13,435 $14,928 $15,115 Recycled Water Sales (Consumption) 213,318 426,636 639,954 853,272 1,066,590 1,279,908 1,493,226 1,706,544 1,919,862 2,133,180 2,346,498 Avoided Cost (Potable - Recycled) 85,754 171,508 257,261 343,015 428,769 514,523 600,277 686,031 771,784 857,538 943,292 Interest Income (Excludes Bond Proceeds) 0 52,361 21,195 0 67,908 44,175 24,090 23,530 11,602 3,959 654 Bond Proceeds 7,080,000 0 0 7,080,000 0 0 1,055,000 0 0 0 0 Total Revenues $7,380,565 $653,491 $922,889 $8,282,259 $1,570,731 $1,847,563 $3,183,042 $2,428,047 $2,716,684 $3,009,605 $3,305,559 Expenses
Operations & Maintenance Cost $38,895 $40,062 $41,264 $42,502 $43,777 $45,090 $46,443 $47,836 $49,271 $50,749 $52,272 Capital Costs - Alt1 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 Capital Costs - Recycled Water & Expansion Improvements 65,000 66,300 67,626 68,979 70,358 71,765 73,201 74,665 76,158 77,681 79,235 Debt Service 286,200 413,774 413,774 827,549 827,549 827,549 889,427 889,427 889,427 889,427 889,427 Total Expenses $2,750,239 $2,880,280 $2,882,808 $3,299,173 $3,301,827 $3,304,548 $3,369,214 $3,372,071 $3,374,999 $3,378,001 $3,381,077 Surplus / (Deficit) $4,630,326 ($2,226,789) ($1,959,919) $4,983,086 ($1,731,096) ($1,456,984) ($186,172) ($944,024) ($658,316) ($368,395) ($75,518) Ending Fund Balance $4,630,326 $2,403,537 $443,618 $5,426,704 $3,695,608 $2,238,623 $2,052,452 $1,108,428 $450,112 $81,716 $6,199 Debt Service Coverage Ratio 25.65x 1.48x 2.13x 9.96x 1.85x 2.18x 3.53x 2.68x 3.00x 3.33x 3.66x Cashflow-11year
Table G.5 - Scenario 3 (11-Year Cash Flow)
Annual Recycled Water Customers
Cumulative Recycled Water Customers
Annual Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Cumulative Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Beginning Fund Balance
Revenues
Recycled Water Meter Charges
Recycled Water Sales (Consumption)
Avoided Cost (Potable - Recycled)
Interest Income (Excludes Bond Proceeds)
Bond Proceeds
Total Revenues
Expenses
Operations & Maintenance Cost
Capital Costs - Alt1
Capital Costs - Recycled Water & Expansion Improvements Debt Service
Total Expenses
Surplus / (Deficit)
Ending Fund Balance
Debt Service Coverage Ratio
FYE 2033 FYE 2034 FYE 2035 FYE 2036 FYE 2037 FYE 2038 FYE 2039 FYE 2040 FYE 2041 FYE 2042 FYE 2043 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81
42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 511,963 554,627 597,290 639,954 682,618 725,281 767,945 810,608 853,272 895,936 938,599 $6,199 $227,686 $750,556 $1,579,246 $2,718,260 $4,172,168 $5,945,605 $8,043,275 $10,469,947 $13,230,462 $16,329,730 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 2,559,816 2,773,134 2,986,452 3,199,770 3,413,088 3,626,406 3,839,724 4,053,042 4,266,360 4,479,678 4,692,996 1,029,046 1,114,800 1,200,554 1,286,307 1,372,061 1,457,815 1,543,569 1,629,323 1,715,077 1,800,830 1,886,584 1,741 7,282 17,343 31,991 51,294 75,318 104,136 137,816 176,430 220,051 268,753 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$3,605,718 $3,910,331 $4,219,464 $4,533,183 $4,851,557 $5,174,654 $5,502,543 $5,835,295 $6,172,981 $6,515,674 $6,863,448 $53,840 $55,455 $57,119 $58,832 $60,597 $62,415 $64,288 $66,216 $68,203 $70,249 $72,356 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 80,819 82,436 84,084 85,766 87,481 89,231 91,016 92,836 94,693 96,587 98,518 889,427 889,427 889,427 889,427 889,427 889,427 889,427 889,427 889,427 889,427 889,427 $3,384,230 $3,387,461 $3,390,774 $3,394,169 $3,397,649 $3,401,217 $3,404,874 $3,408,623 $3,412,466 $3,416,406 $3,420,445 $221,488 $522,869 $828,690 $1,139,014 $1,453,908 $1,773,437 $2,097,669 $2,426,672 $2,760,515 $3,099,268 $3,443,002 $227,686 $750,556 $1,579,246 $2,718,260 $4,172,168 $5,945,605 $8,043,275 $10,469,947 $13,230,462 $16,329,730 $19,772,732
3.99x 4.33x 4.68x 5.03x 5.39x 5.75x 6.11x 6.49x 6.86x 7.25x 7.64x Cashflow-11year
Table G.5 - Scenario 3 (11-Year Cash Flow)
Annual Recycled Water Customers
Cumulative Recycled Water Customers
Annual Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Cumulative Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Beginning Fund Balance
Revenues
Recycled Water Meter Charges
Recycled Water Sales (Consumption)
Avoided Cost (Potable - Recycled)
Interest Income (Excludes Bond Proceeds)
Bond Proceeds
Total Revenues
Expenses
Operations & Maintenance Cost
Capital Costs - Alt1
Capital Costs - Recycled Water & Expansion Improvements Debt Service
Total Expenses
Surplus / (Deficit)
Ending Fund Balance
Debt Service Coverage Ratio
FYE 2044 FYE 2045 FYE 2046 FYE 2047 FYE 2048 FYE 2049 FYE 2050 FYE 2051 FYE 2052 FYE 2053 FYE 2054 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81
42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 981,263 1,023,926 1,066,590 1,109,254 1,151,917 1,194,581 1,237,244 1,279,908 1,322,572 1,365,235 1,407,899 $19,772,732 $23,564,522 $27,710,227 $32,215,046 $37,084,256 $42,323,209 $47,937,334 $53,932,139 $60,313,211 $67,086,217 $74,673,785 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 4,906,314 5,119,632 5,332,950 5,546,268 5,759,586 5,972,904 6,186,222 6,399,540 6,612,858 6,826,176 7,039,494 1,972,338 2,058,092 2,143,846 2,229,600 2,315,353 2,401,107 2,486,861 2,572,615 2,658,369 2,744,123 2,829,876 322,610 381,698 446,094 515,876 591,123 671,915 758,334 850,462 948,383 1,055,285 1,171,302 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$7,216,376 $7,574,536 $7,938,004 $8,306,858 $8,681,176 $9,061,040 $9,446,531 $9,837,731 $10,234,724 $10,640,698 $11,055,787 $74,527 $76,763 $79,066 $81,438 $83,881 $86,397 $88,989 $91,659 $94,409 $97,241 $100,158 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 100,489 102,498 104,548 106,639 108,772 110,948 113,167 115,430 117,739 120,093 122,495 889,427 889,427 889,427 889,427 889,427 889,427 889,427 889,427 889,427 475,653 475,653 $3,424,586 $3,428,832 $3,433,185 $3,437,648 $3,442,224 $3,446,915 $3,451,726 $3,456,659 $3,461,718 $3,053,130 $3,058,449 $3,791,790 $4,145,704 $4,504,819 $4,869,210 $5,238,953 $5,614,125 $5,994,805 $6,381,072 $6,773,006 $7,587,568 $7,997,337 $23,564,522 $27,710,227 $32,215,046 $37,084,256 $42,323,209 $47,937,334 $53,932,139 $60,313,211 $67,086,217 $74,673,785 $82,671,123
8.03x 8.43x 8.84x 9.25x 9.67x 10.09x 10.52x 10.96x 11.40x 22.17x 23.03x Cashflow-11year
Table G.5 - Scenario 3 (11-Year Cash Flow)
Annual Recycled Water Customers
Cumulative Recycled Water Customers
Annual Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Cumulative Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Beginning Fund Balance
Revenues
Recycled Water Meter Charges
Recycled Water Sales (Consumption)
Avoided Cost (Potable - Recycled)
Interest Income (Excludes Bond Proceeds)
Bond Proceeds
Total Revenues
Expenses
Operations & Maintenance Cost
Capital Costs - Alt1
Capital Costs - Recycled Water & Expansion Improvements Debt Service
Total Expenses
Surplus / (Deficit)
Ending Fund Balance
Debt Service Coverage Ratio
FYE 2055 FYE 2056 FYE 2057 FYE 2058 FYE 2059 FYE 2060 FYE 2061 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
81 81 81 81 81 81 81
42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664
1,450,562 1,493,226 1,535,890 1,578,553 1,621,217 1,663,880 1,706,544 $82,671,123 $91,501,117 $100,759,241 $110,451,771 $120,647,420 $131,291,239 $142,389,795 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 7,252,812 7,466,130 7,679,448 7,892,766 8,106,084 8,319,402 8,532,720 2,915,630 3,001,384 3,087,138 3,172,892 3,258,646 3,344,399 3,430,153 1,296,568 1,431,219 1,572,290 1,720,341 1,875,474 2,037,328 2,206,002 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$11,480,124 $11,913,847 $12,353,991 $12,801,114 $13,255,318 $13,716,244 $14,183,989 $103,163 $106,258 $109,446 $112,729 $116,111 $119,594 $123,182 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 124,945 127,444 129,993 132,593 135,245 137,949 140,708 61,878 61,878 61,878 (0) (0) (0) (0)
$2,650,130 $2,655,724 $2,661,460 $2,605,465 $2,611,499 $2,617,687 $2,624,034 $8,829,994 $9,258,124 $9,692,531 $10,195,648 $10,643,819 $11,098,557 $11,559,955 $91,501,117 $100,759,241 $110,451,771 $120,647,420 $131,291,239 $142,389,795 $153,949,751 183.86x 190.82x 197.88x N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cashflow-11year
Table G.6 - Unit Cost and Sensitivity Analysis
Unit Cost and Sensitivity Analysis
Scenario Total Cost Acre Feet $ / AF
27-Year $41,069,352 469,300 $88
14-Year $49,146,879 469,300 $105
11-Year $54,219,714 469,300 $116
Demand Reduction
Scenario Baseline 5% 10% 20%
27-Year $88 $92 $97 $109
14-Year 105 110 116 131
11-Year 116 122 128 144
APPENDICES | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL | MARCH 2022
Appendix H
PAYGO FUNDING OPTION TABLES
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW | RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY | ABBREVIATIONS MARCH 2022 | FINAL
-This Page Intentionally Left Blank -
Table H.2 - Cashflow Assumptions
CASH FLOW ASSUMPTIONS VALUES
2022 Beginning Fund Balance $0
O&M Projection (% of Capital) 2.0%
O&M Inflation Escalator 3.0%
Capital - Recycled Water System & Expansion 65,000
Capital - Recycled Water System & Expansion Inflation Escalator 2.0% Interest Income 1.5%
Acre-Feet to Cubic Feet 43,560
Issue Debt Yes
Sites for Conversion 81
Scenario 1 - 3 sites per Year 27
Scenario 2 - 6 sites per Year 14
Scenario 3 - 8 sites per Year 11
DEBT INSTRUMENTS AND RATES
Revenue Bond 4.0%
SRF Loan 1.5%
Tier 2 $7.01
5/8" Meter Charge $15.55
Recycled Water Rate per CCF $5.00
Table H.3 - Scenario 1 (27-Year Cash Flow) FYE 2022 FYE 2023 FYE 2024 FYE 2025 FYE 2026 FYE 2027 FYE 2028 FYE 2029 FYE 2030 FYE 2031 FYE 2032 Annual Recycled Water Customers 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Cumulative Recycled Water Customers 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 Annual Recycled Water Demand (CCF) 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 Cumulative Recycled Water Demand (CCF) 17,381 34,763 52,144 69,526 86,907 104,289 121,670 139,052 156,433 173,815 191,196 Beginning Fund Balance $0 ($919,982) ($1,719,336) ($2,398,101) ($2,956,320) ($3,394,034) ($3,711,286) ($3,908,120) ($3,984,582) ($3,940,719) ($3,776,577) Revenues
Recycled Water Meter Charges $560 $1,120 $1,679 $2,239 $2,799 $3,359 $3,919 $4,478 $5,038 $5,598 $6,158 Recycled Water Sales (Consumption) 86,907 173,815 260,722 347,629 434,537 521,444 608,351 695,259 782,166 869,073 955,981 Avoided Cost (Potable - Recycled) 34,937 69,873 104,810 139,747 174,684 209,620 244,557 279,494 314,431 349,367 384,304 Interest Income (Excludes Bond Proceeds) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bond Proceeds 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Revenues $122,404 $244,808 $367,212 $489,616 $612,019 $734,423 $856,827 $979,231 $1,101,635 $1,224,039 $1,346,443 Expenses
Operations & Maintenance Cost $15,846 $16,322 $16,811 $17,316 $17,835 $18,370 $18,921 $19,489 $20,073 $20,676 $21,296 Capital Costs - Alt1 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 Capital Costs - Recycled Water & Expansion Improvements 65,000 66,300 67,626 68,979 70,358 71,765 73,201 74,665 76,158 77,681 79,235 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Expenses $1,042,386 $1,044,161 $1,045,977 $1,047,834 $1,049,733 $1,051,675 $1,053,662 $1,055,693 $1,057,771 $1,059,897 $1,062,071 Surplus / (Deficit) ($919,982) ($799,354) ($678,766) ($558,218) ($437,714) ($317,252) ($196,835) ($76,462) $43,864 $164,142 $284,372 Ending Fund Balance ($919,982) ($1,719,336) ($2,398,101) ($2,956,320) ($3,394,034) ($3,711,286) ($3,908,120) ($3,984,582) ($3,940,719) ($3,776,577) ($3,492,204) Debt Service Coverage Ratio N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Cashflow-27year
Table H.3 - Scenario 1 (27-Year Cash Flow)
Annual Recycled Water Customers
Cumulative Recycled Water Customers
Annual Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Cumulative Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Beginning Fund Balance
Revenues
Recycled Water Meter Charges
Recycled Water Sales (Consumption)
Avoided Cost (Potable - Recycled)
Interest Income (Excludes Bond Proceeds)
Bond Proceeds
Total Revenues
Expenses
Operations & Maintenance Cost
Capital Costs - Alt1
Capital Costs - Recycled Water & Expansion Improvements Debt Service
Total Expenses
Surplus / (Deficit)
Ending Fund Balance
Debt Service Coverage Ratio
FYE 2033 FYE 2034 FYE 2035 FYE 2036 FYE 2037 FYE 2038 FYE 2039 FYE 2040 FYE 2041 FYE 2042 FYE 2043 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
36 39 42 45 48 51 54 57 60 63 66
17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 208,578 225,959 243,341 260,722 278,103 295,485 312,866 330,248 347,629 365,011 382,392 ($3,492,204) ($3,087,652) ($2,562,970) ($1,918,211) ($1,153,427) ($268,675) $739,497 $1,883,546 $3,165,452 $4,587,223 $6,150,894 $6,718 $7,277 $7,837 $8,397 $8,957 $9,517 $10,076 $10,636 $11,196 $11,756 $12,316 1,042,888 1,129,795 1,216,703 1,303,610 1,390,517 1,477,425 1,564,332 1,651,239 1,738,147 1,825,054 1,911,961 419,241 454,178 489,114 524,051 558,988 593,925 628,861 663,798 698,735 733,672 768,608 0 0 0 0 0 3,505 19,526 37,586 57,712 79,936 104,289
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$1,468,847 $1,591,250 $1,713,654 $1,836,058 $1,958,462 $2,084,371 $2,222,796 $2,363,259 $2,505,790 $2,650,418 $2,797,174 $21,935 $22,593 $23,271 $23,969 $24,688 $25,428 $26,191 $26,977 $27,786 $28,620 $29,479 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 80,819 82,436 84,084 85,766 87,481 89,231 91,016 92,836 94,693 96,587 98,518 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$1,064,294 $1,066,569 $1,068,895 $1,071,275 $1,073,709 $1,076,199 $1,078,747 $1,081,353 $1,084,019 $1,086,746 $1,089,537 $404,552 $524,682 $644,759 $764,783 $884,753 $1,008,171 $1,144,049 $1,281,906 $1,421,771 $1,563,671 $1,707,637 ($3,087,652) ($2,562,970) ($1,918,211) ($1,153,427) ($268,675) $739,497 $1,883,546 $3,165,452 $4,587,223 $6,150,894 $7,858,531
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cashflow-27year
Table H.3 - Scenario 1 (27-Year Cash Flow)
Annual Recycled Water Customers
Cumulative Recycled Water Customers
Annual Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Cumulative Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Beginning Fund Balance
Revenues
Recycled Water Meter Charges
Recycled Water Sales (Consumption)
Avoided Cost (Potable - Recycled)
Interest Income (Excludes Bond Proceeds)
Bond Proceeds
Total Revenues
Expenses
Operations & Maintenance Cost
Capital Costs - Alt1
Capital Costs - Recycled Water & Expansion Improvements Debt Service
Total Expenses
Surplus / (Deficit)
Ending Fund Balance
Debt Service Coverage Ratio
FYE 2044 FYE 2045 FYE 2046 FYE 2047 FYE 2048 FYE 2049 FYE 2050 FYE 2051 FYE 2052 FYE 2053 FYE 2054 3 3 3 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
69 72 75 78 81 81 81 81 81 81 81
17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 399,774 417,155 434,537 451,918 469,300 486,681 504,063 521,444 538,825 556,207 573,588 $7,858,531 $9,712,229 $11,714,111 $13,866,332 $16,171,079 $18,630,567 $21,246,481 $24,021,092 $26,956,704 $30,055,653 $33,320,310 $12,875 $13,435 $13,995 $14,555 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 1,998,869 2,085,776 2,172,683 2,259,591 2,346,498 2,433,405 2,520,313 2,607,220 2,694,127 2,781,035 2,867,942 803,545 838,482 873,419 908,355 943,292 978,229 1,013,166 1,048,102 1,083,039 1,117,976 1,152,913 130,800 159,501 190,425 223,604 259,069 296,851 336,979 379,487 424,410 471,781 521,638 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$2,946,089 $3,097,194 $3,250,522 $3,406,104 $3,563,974 $3,723,600 $3,885,572 $4,049,924 $4,216,691 $4,385,906 $4,557,607 $30,363 $31,274 $32,212 $33,178 $34,174 $35,199 $36,255 $37,343 $38,463 $39,617 $40,805 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 100,489 102,498 104,548 106,639 108,772 110,948 113,167 115,430 117,739 120,093 122,495 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$1,092,392 $1,095,312 $1,098,300 $1,101,358 $1,104,486 $1,107,686 $1,110,961 $1,114,312 $1,117,741 $1,121,250 $1,124,840 $1,853,697 $2,001,882 $2,152,222 $2,304,747 $2,459,488 $2,615,914 $2,774,611 $2,935,612 $3,098,949 $3,264,657 $3,432,767 $9,712,229 $11,714,111 $13,866,332 $16,171,079 $18,630,567 $21,246,481 $24,021,092 $26,956,704 $30,055,653 $33,320,310 $36,753,077
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cashflow-27year
Table H.3 - Scenario 1 (27-Year Cash Flow)
Annual Recycled Water Customers
Cumulative Recycled Water Customers
Annual Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Cumulative Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Beginning Fund Balance
Revenues
Recycled Water Meter Charges
Recycled Water Sales (Consumption)
Avoided Cost (Potable - Recycled)
Interest Income (Excludes Bond Proceeds)
Bond Proceeds
Total Revenues
Expenses
Operations & Maintenance Cost
Capital Costs - Alt1
Capital Costs - Recycled Water & Expansion Improvements Debt Service
Total Expenses
Surplus / (Deficit)
Ending Fund Balance
Debt Service Coverage Ratio
FYE 2055 FYE 2056 FYE 2057 FYE 2058 FYE 2059 FYE 2060 FYE 2061 FYE 2062 FYE 2063 FYE 2064 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81
17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 17,381 590,970 608,351 625,733 643,114 660,496 677,877 695,259 712,640 730,022 747,403 $36,753,077 $40,356,391 $44,132,726 $48,084,587 $52,214,516 $56,525,093 $61,018,931 $65,698,683 $70,567,036 $75,626,718 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 2,954,849 3,041,757 3,128,664 3,215,571 3,302,479 3,389,386 3,476,293 3,563,201 3,650,108 3,737,015 1,187,849 1,222,786 1,257,723 1,292,660 1,327,596 1,362,533 1,397,470 1,432,407 1,467,343 1,502,280 574,016 628,951 686,481 746,643 809,476 875,018 943,307 1,014,385 1,088,291 1,165,066 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$4,731,829 $4,908,609 $5,087,983 $5,269,989 $5,454,666 $5,642,051 $5,832,185 $6,025,107 $6,220,857 $6,419,476 $42,029 $43,290 $44,589 $45,927 $47,304 $48,724 $50,185 $51,691 $53,242 $54,839 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 961,540 124,945 127,444 129,993 132,593 135,245 137,949 140,708 143,523 146,393 149,321 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$1,128,514 $1,132,274 $1,136,122 $1,140,059 $1,144,089 $1,148,213 $1,152,434 $1,156,753 $1,161,175 $1,165,700 $3,603,315 $3,776,334 $3,951,861 $4,129,930 $4,310,577 $4,493,838 $4,679,751 $4,868,353 $5,059,682 $5,253,776 $40,356,391 $44,132,726 $48,084,587 $52,214,516 $56,525,093 $61,018,931 $65,698,683 $70,567,036 $75,626,718 $80,880,495
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cashflow-27year
Table H.4 - Scenario 2 (14-Year Cash Flow) FYE 2022 FYE 2023 FYE 2024 FYE 2025 FYE 2026 FYE 2027 FYE 2028 FYE 2029 FYE 2030 FYE 2031 FYE 2032 Annual Recycled Water Customers 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
Cumulative Recycled Water Customers 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 Annual Recycled Water Demand (CCF) 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 Cumulative Recycled Water Demand (CCF) 33,521 67,043 100,564 134,086 167,607 201,128 234,650 268,171 301,693 335,214 368,735 Beginning Fund Balance $0 ($1,713,854) ($3,193,821) ($4,439,953) ($5,452,306) ($6,230,935) ($6,775,900) ($7,087,257) ($7,165,069) ($7,009,397) ($6,620,305) Revenues
Recycled Water Meter Charges $1,120 $2,239 $3,359 $4,478 $5,598 $6,718 $7,837 $8,957 $10,076 $11,196 $12,316 Recycled Water Sales (Consumption) 167,607 335,214 502,821 670,428 838,035 1,005,642 1,173,249 1,340,856 1,508,463 1,676,070 1,843,677 Avoided Cost (Potable - Recycled) 67,378 134,756 202,134 269,512 336,890 404,268 471,646 539,024 606,402 673,780 741,158 Interest Income (Excludes Bond Proceeds) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bond Proceeds 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Revenues $236,105 $472,209 $708,314 $944,418 $1,180,523 $1,416,628 $1,652,732 $1,888,837 $2,124,941 $2,361,046 $2,597,151 Expenses
Operations & Maintenance Cost $30,560 $31,477 $32,422 $33,394 $34,396 $35,428 $36,491 $37,586 $38,713 $39,875 $41,071 Capital Costs - Alt1 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 Capital Costs - Recycled Water & Expansion Improvements 65,000 66,300 67,626 68,979 70,358 71,765 73,201 74,665 76,158 77,681 79,235 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Expenses $1,949,959 $1,952,176 $1,954,446 $1,956,771 $1,959,153 $1,961,592 $1,964,090 $1,966,649 $1,969,269 $1,971,954 $1,974,704 Surplus / (Deficit) ($1,713,854) ($1,479,967) ($1,246,132) ($1,012,353) ($778,630) ($544,964) ($311,358) ($77,812) $155,672 $389,092 $622,447 Ending Fund Balance ($1,713,854) ($3,193,821) ($4,439,953) ($5,452,306) ($6,230,935) ($6,775,900) ($7,087,257) ($7,165,069) ($7,009,397) ($6,620,305) ($5,997,858) Debt Service Coverage Ratio N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Cashflow-14year
Table H.4 - Scenario 2 (14-Year Cash Flow)
Annual Recycled Water Customers
Cumulative Recycled Water Customers
Annual Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Cumulative Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Beginning Fund Balance
Revenues
Recycled Water Meter Charges
Recycled Water Sales (Consumption)
Avoided Cost (Potable - Recycled)
Interest Income (Excludes Bond Proceeds)
Bond Proceeds
Total Revenues
Expenses
Operations & Maintenance Cost
Capital Costs - Alt1
Capital Costs - Recycled Water & Expansion Improvements Debt Service
Total Expenses
Surplus / (Deficit)
Ending Fund Balance
Debt Service Coverage Ratio
FYE 2033 FYE 2034 FYE 2035 FYE 2036 FYE 2037 FYE 2038 FYE 2039 FYE 2040 FYE 2041 FYE 2042 FYE 2043 6 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
72 78 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81
33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 402,257 435,778 469,300 502,821 536,342 569,864 603,385 636,907 670,428 703,949 737,471 ($5,997,858) ($5,142,123) ($4,053,169) ($2,731,627) ($1,178,127) $607,256 $2,648,683 $4,954,199 $7,527,684 $10,373,076 $13,494,368 $13,435 $14,555 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 2,011,284 2,178,891 2,346,498 2,514,105 2,681,712 2,849,319 3,016,926 3,184,533 3,352,140 3,519,747 3,687,354 808,536 875,914 943,292 1,010,670 1,078,048 1,145,426 1,212,804 1,280,182 1,347,560 1,414,938 1,482,316 0 0 0 0 0 24,238 56,597 92,917 133,256 177,673 226,228
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$2,833,255 $3,069,360 $3,304,905 $3,539,890 $3,774,875 $4,034,097 $4,301,442 $4,572,747 $4,848,071 $5,127,473 $5,411,013 $42,303 $43,572 $44,879 $46,225 $47,612 $49,041 $50,512 $52,027 $53,588 $55,196 $56,852 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 80,819 82,436 84,084 85,766 87,481 89,231 91,016 92,836 94,693 96,587 98,518 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$1,977,521 $1,980,406 $1,983,362 $1,986,390 $1,989,492 $1,992,670 $1,995,926 $1,999,262 $2,002,679 $2,006,181 $2,009,768 $855,735 $1,088,954 $1,321,543 $1,553,500 $1,785,383 $2,041,427 $2,305,516 $2,573,485 $2,845,392 $3,121,292 $3,401,245 ($5,142,123) ($4,053,169) ($2,731,627) ($1,178,127) $607,256 $2,648,683 $4,954,199 $7,527,684 $10,373,076 $13,494,368 $16,895,613
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cashflow-14year
Table H.4 - Scenario 2 (14-Year Cash Flow)
Annual Recycled Water Customers
Cumulative Recycled Water Customers
Annual Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Cumulative Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Beginning Fund Balance
Revenues
Recycled Water Meter Charges
Recycled Water Sales (Consumption)
Avoided Cost (Potable - Recycled)
Interest Income (Excludes Bond Proceeds)
Bond Proceeds
Total Revenues
Expenses
Operations & Maintenance Cost
Capital Costs - Alt1
Capital Costs - Recycled Water & Expansion Improvements Debt Service
Total Expenses
Surplus / (Deficit)
Ending Fund Balance
Debt Service Coverage Ratio
FYE 2044 FYE 2045 FYE 2046 FYE 2047 FYE 2048 FYE 2049 FYE 2050 FYE 2051 FYE 2052 FYE 2053 FYE 2054 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81
33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 770,992 804,514 838,035 871,556 905,078 938,599 972,121 1,005,642 1,039,163 1,072,685 1,106,206 $16,895,613 $20,580,920 $24,554,460 $28,820,461 $33,383,216 $38,247,077 $43,416,459 $48,895,842 $54,689,769 $60,802,850 $67,239,761 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 3,854,961 4,022,568 4,190,175 4,357,782 4,525,389 4,692,996 4,860,603 5,028,210 5,195,817 5,363,424 5,531,031 1,549,694 1,617,072 1,684,450 1,751,828 1,819,206 1,886,584 1,953,962 2,021,340 2,088,718 2,156,096 2,223,474 278,982 335,995 397,332 463,055 533,228 607,917 687,188 771,109 859,747 953,171 1,051,452 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$5,698,751 $5,990,750 $6,287,072 $6,587,779 $6,892,938 $7,202,612 $7,516,868 $7,835,774 $8,159,396 $8,487,806 $8,821,071 $58,557 $60,314 $62,123 $63,987 $65,906 $67,884 $69,920 $72,018 $74,178 $76,404 $78,696 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 100,489 102,498 104,548 106,639 108,772 110,948 113,167 115,430 117,739 120,093 122,495 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$2,013,444 $2,017,211 $2,021,070 $2,025,025 $2,029,077 $2,033,230 $2,037,485 $2,041,846 $2,046,315 $2,050,895 $2,055,589 $3,685,307 $3,973,539 $4,266,002 $4,562,755 $4,863,861 $5,169,382 $5,479,383 $5,793,927 $6,113,081 $6,436,910 $6,765,482 $20,580,920 $24,554,460 $28,820,461 $33,383,216 $38,247,077 $43,416,459 $48,895,842 $54,689,769 $60,802,850 $67,239,761 $74,005,243
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cashflow-14year
Table H.4 - Scenario 2 (14-Year Cash Flow)
Annual Recycled Water Customers
Cumulative Recycled Water Customers
Annual Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Cumulative Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Beginning Fund Balance
Revenues
Recycled Water Meter Charges
Recycled Water Sales (Consumption)
Avoided Cost (Potable - Recycled)
Interest Income (Excludes Bond Proceeds)
Bond Proceeds
Total Revenues
Expenses
Operations & Maintenance Cost
Capital Costs - Alt1
Capital Costs - Recycled Water & Expansion Improvements Debt Service
Total Expenses
Surplus / (Deficit)
Ending Fund Balance
Debt Service Coverage Ratio
FYE 2055 FYE 2056 FYE 2057 FYE 2058 FYE 2059 FYE 2060 FYE 2061 FYE 2062 FYE 2063 FYE 2064 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81
33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 33,521 1,139,728 1,173,249 1,206,770 1,240,292 1,273,813 1,307,335 1,340,856 1,374,377 1,407,899 1,441,420 $74,005,243 $81,104,107 $88,541,235 $96,321,576 $104,450,150 $112,932,052 $121,772,447 $130,976,575 $140,549,752 $150,497,370 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 5,698,638 5,866,245 6,033,852 6,201,459 6,369,066 6,536,673 6,704,280 6,871,887 7,039,494 7,207,101 2,290,852 2,358,230 2,425,608 2,492,986 2,560,364 2,627,742 2,695,120 2,762,498 2,829,876 2,897,255 1,154,660 1,262,869 1,376,150 1,494,579 1,618,230 1,747,180 1,881,506 2,021,288 2,166,604 2,317,535 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$9,159,265 $9,502,458 $9,850,725 $10,204,138 $10,562,775 $10,926,710 $11,296,021 $11,670,788 $12,051,089 $12,437,005 $81,057 $83,488 $85,993 $88,573 $91,230 $93,967 $96,786 $99,689 $102,680 $105,761 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 1,854,398 124,945 127,444 129,993 132,593 135,245 137,949 140,708 143,523 146,393 149,321 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$2,060,400 $2,065,331 $2,070,384 $2,075,564 $2,080,873 $2,086,315 $2,091,893 $2,097,610 $2,103,472 $2,109,480 $7,098,865 $7,437,128 $7,780,341 $8,128,575 $8,481,902 $8,840,395 $9,204,128 $9,573,177 $9,947,617 $10,327,525 $81,104,107 $88,541,235 $96,321,576 $104,450,150 $112,932,052 $121,772,447 $130,976,575 $140,549,752 $150,497,370 $160,824,895
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cashflow-14year
Table H.5 - Scenario 3 (11-Year Cash Flow) FYE 2022 FYE 2023 FYE 2024 FYE 2025 FYE 2026 FYE 2027 FYE 2028 FYE 2029 FYE 2030 FYE 2031 FYE 2032 Annual Recycled Water Customers 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 1
Cumulative Recycled Water Customers 8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72 80 81 Annual Recycled Water Demand (CCF) 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 Cumulative Recycled Water Demand (CCF) 42,664 85,327 127,991 170,654 213,318 255,982 298,645 341,309 383,972 426,636 469,300 Beginning Fund Balance $0 ($2,163,474) ($4,028,850) ($5,596,190) ($6,865,555) ($7,837,010) ($8,510,621) ($8,886,456) ($8,964,583) ($8,745,074) ($8,228,002) Revenues
Recycled Water Meter Charges $1,493 $2,986 $4,478 $5,971 $7,464 $8,957 $10,450 $11,942 $13,435 $14,928 $15,115 Recycled Water Sales (Consumption) 213,318 426,636 639,954 853,272 1,066,590 1,279,908 1,493,226 1,706,544 1,919,862 2,133,180 2,346,498 Avoided Cost (Potable - Recycled) 85,754 171,508 257,261 343,015 428,769 514,523 600,277 686,031 771,784 857,538 943,292 Interest Income (Excludes Bond Proceeds) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bond Proceeds 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Revenues $300,565 $601,129 $901,694 $1,202,259 $1,502,823 $1,803,388 $2,103,952 $2,404,517 $2,705,082 $3,005,646 $3,304,905 Expenses
Operations & Maintenance Cost $38,895 $40,062 $41,264 $42,502 $43,777 $45,090 $46,443 $47,836 $49,271 $50,749 $52,272 Capital Costs - Alt1 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 Capital Costs - Recycled Water & Expansion Improvements 65,000 66,300 67,626 68,979 70,358 71,765 73,201 74,665 76,158 77,681 79,235 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Expenses $2,464,039 $2,466,505 $2,469,033 $2,471,624 $2,474,278 $2,476,999 $2,479,787 $2,482,644 $2,485,573 $2,488,574 $2,491,650 Surplus / (Deficit) ($2,163,474) ($1,865,376) ($1,567,339) ($1,269,365) ($971,455) ($673,611) ($375,835) ($78,127) $219,509 $517,072 $813,255 Ending Fund Balance ($2,163,474) ($4,028,850) ($5,596,190) ($6,865,555) ($7,837,010) ($8,510,621) ($8,886,456) ($8,964,583) ($8,745,074) ($8,228,002) ($7,414,747) Debt Service Coverage Ratio N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Cashflow-11year
Table H.5 - Scenario 3 (11-Year Cash Flow)
Annual Recycled Water Customers
Cumulative Recycled Water Customers
Annual Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Cumulative Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Beginning Fund Balance
Revenues
Recycled Water Meter Charges
Recycled Water Sales (Consumption)
Avoided Cost (Potable - Recycled)
Interest Income (Excludes Bond Proceeds)
Bond Proceeds
Total Revenues
Expenses
Operations & Maintenance Cost
Capital Costs - Alt1
Capital Costs - Recycled Water & Expansion Improvements Debt Service
Total Expenses
Surplus / (Deficit)
Ending Fund Balance
Debt Service Coverage Ratio
FYE 2033 FYE 2034 FYE 2035 FYE 2036 FYE 2037 FYE 2038 FYE 2039 FYE 2040 FYE 2041 FYE 2042 FYE 2043 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81
42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 511,963 554,627 597,290 639,954 682,618 725,281 767,945 810,608 853,272 895,936 938,599 ($7,414,747) ($6,305,573) ($4,900,559) ($3,199,786) ($1,203,336) $1,088,706 $3,711,989 $6,672,251 $9,974,456 $13,623,636 $17,624,899 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 2,559,816 2,773,134 2,986,452 3,199,770 3,413,088 3,626,406 3,839,724 4,053,042 4,266,360 4,479,678 4,692,996 1,029,046 1,114,800 1,200,554 1,286,307 1,372,061 1,457,815 1,543,569 1,629,323 1,715,077 1,800,830 1,886,584 0 0 0 0 0 35,737 77,302 123,921 175,668 232,619 294,851 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$3,603,977 $3,903,048 $4,202,120 $4,501,192 $4,800,264 $5,135,073 $5,475,710 $5,821,400 $6,172,219 $6,528,242 $6,889,546 $53,840 $55,455 $57,119 $58,832 $60,597 $62,415 $64,288 $66,216 $68,203 $70,249 $72,356 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 80,819 82,436 84,084 85,766 87,481 89,231 91,016 92,836 94,693 96,587 98,518 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$2,494,803 $2,498,034 $2,501,347 $2,504,742 $2,508,222 $2,511,790 $2,515,447 $2,519,196 $2,523,039 $2,526,979 $2,531,018 $1,109,174 $1,405,014 $1,700,773 $1,996,450 $2,292,042 $2,623,283 $2,960,263 $3,302,204 $3,649,180 $4,001,263 $4,358,528 ($6,305,573) ($4,900,559) ($3,199,786) ($1,203,336) $1,088,706 $3,711,989 $6,672,251 $9,974,456 $13,623,636 $17,624,899 $21,983,427
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cashflow-11year
Table H.5 - Scenario 3 (11-Year Cash Flow)
Annual Recycled Water Customers
Cumulative Recycled Water Customers
Annual Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Cumulative Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Beginning Fund Balance
Revenues
Recycled Water Meter Charges
Recycled Water Sales (Consumption)
Avoided Cost (Potable - Recycled)
Interest Income (Excludes Bond Proceeds)
Bond Proceeds
Total Revenues
Expenses
Operations & Maintenance Cost
Capital Costs - Alt1
Capital Costs - Recycled Water & Expansion Improvements Debt Service
Total Expenses
Surplus / (Deficit)
Ending Fund Balance
Debt Service Coverage Ratio
FYE 2044 FYE 2045 FYE 2046 FYE 2047 FYE 2048 FYE 2049 FYE 2050 FYE 2051 FYE 2052 FYE 2053 FYE 2054 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81
42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 981,263 1,023,926 1,066,590 1,109,254 1,151,917 1,194,581 1,237,244 1,279,908 1,322,572 1,365,235 1,407,899 $21,983,427 $26,704,475 $31,793,376 $37,255,541 $43,096,456 $49,321,689 $55,936,889 $62,947,785 $70,360,189 $78,179,998 $86,413,192 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 4,906,314 5,119,632 5,332,950 5,546,268 5,759,586 5,972,904 6,186,222 6,399,540 6,612,858 6,826,176 7,039,494 1,972,338 2,058,092 2,143,846 2,229,600 2,315,353 2,401,107 2,486,861 2,572,615 2,658,369 2,744,123 2,829,876 362,441 435,468 514,012 598,154 687,976 783,563 884,998 992,367 1,105,758 1,225,259 1,350,961 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$7,256,208 $7,628,306 $8,005,922 $8,389,136 $8,778,030 $9,172,688 $9,573,195 $9,979,636 $10,392,099 $10,810,673 $11,235,445 $74,527 $76,763 $79,066 $81,438 $83,881 $86,397 $88,989 $91,659 $94,409 $97,241 $100,158 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 100,489 102,498 104,548 106,639 108,772 110,948 113,167 115,430 117,739 120,093 122,495 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$2,535,159 $2,539,405 $2,543,758 $2,548,221 $2,552,797 $2,557,488 $2,562,299 $2,567,232 $2,572,291 $2,577,478 $2,582,797 $4,721,048 $5,088,901 $5,462,164 $5,840,915 $6,225,234 $6,615,200 $7,010,896 $7,412,404 $7,819,809 $8,233,195 $8,652,649 $26,704,475 $31,793,376 $37,255,541 $43,096,456 $49,321,689 $55,936,889 $62,947,785 $70,360,189 $78,179,998 $86,413,192 $95,065,841
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cashflow-11year
Table H.5 - Scenario 3 (11-Year Cash Flow)
Annual Recycled Water Customers
Cumulative Recycled Water Customers
Annual Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Cumulative Recycled Water Demand (CCF)
Beginning Fund Balance
Revenues
Recycled Water Meter Charges
Recycled Water Sales (Consumption)
Avoided Cost (Potable - Recycled)
Interest Income (Excludes Bond Proceeds)
Bond Proceeds
Total Revenues
Expenses
Operations & Maintenance Cost
Capital Costs - Alt1
Capital Costs - Recycled Water & Expansion Improvements Debt Service
Total Expenses
Surplus / (Deficit)
Ending Fund Balance
Debt Service Coverage Ratio
FYE 2055 FYE 2056 FYE 2057 FYE 2058 FYE 2059 FYE 2060 FYE 2061 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
81 81 81 81 81 81 81
42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664 42,664
1,450,562 1,493,226 1,535,890 1,578,553 1,621,217 1,663,880 1,706,544 $95,065,841 $104,144,099 $113,654,209 $123,602,507 $133,995,416 $144,839,455 $156,141,235 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 $15,115 7,252,812 7,466,130 7,679,448 7,892,766 8,106,084 8,319,402 8,532,720 2,915,630 3,001,384 3,087,138 3,172,892 3,258,646 3,344,399 3,430,153 1,482,952 1,621,327 1,766,179 1,917,602 2,075,694 2,240,551 2,412,273 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$11,666,509 $12,103,956 $12,547,879 $12,998,375 $13,455,538 $13,919,467 $14,390,261 $103,163 $106,258 $109,446 $112,729 $116,111 $119,594 $123,182 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 2,360,143 124,945 127,444 129,993 132,593 135,245 137,949 140,708 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$2,588,252 $2,593,845 $2,599,582 $2,605,465 $2,611,499 $2,617,687 $2,624,034 $9,078,258 $9,510,111 $9,948,297 $10,392,909 $10,844,039 $11,301,780 $11,766,227 $104,144,099 $113,654,209 $123,602,507 $133,995,416 $144,839,455 $156,141,235 $167,907,462
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cashflow-11year