EXHIBIT 4-A
FINAL MINUTES
Water Demand
Committee of the
Monterey Peninsula
Water Management District
1.
Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7:35 AM.
Directors present: Molly Erickson, Judi Lehman, Zan Henson (arrived at 8:45 AM)
Acting General Manager present: Fran Farina
Staff present: Stephanie Pintar, Water Demand Manager
Gabriella Ayala, Conservation Representative II
Shawn Novack Conservation Representative I
Arlene Tavani, Executive Assistant
2.
Adopt March 6, 2003 and April 8, 2003 Committee Minutes
On a motion by Director Erickson and second by Director Lehman, the minutes of the April 8, 2003 meeting were approved. Director Erickson asked staff to clarify the wording of the first paragraph on page 2 of the minutes, and to make a correction if necessary. The minutes of the March 6, 2003 meeting were not presented for adoption.
3. Status Reports – Discussion of these items was deferred to the end of the meeting following discussion of the Action Items.
The committee encouraged staff to send out a request for proposals for preparation of a policy manual for the Water Demand Division. Shawn Novack, Conservation Representative I, was identified as the project manager for this project.
b. District Access to California-American
Water Company Consumption Records
District staff was directed to place this item on the next Water Demand Committee agenda and to invite Steve Leonard, General Manager of the California-American Water Company (Cal-Am) to attend.
c. Conservation Requirements
District staff was directed to bring the item up for discussion at the next Water Demand Committee meeting.
The committee requested that at the next Water Demand Committee meeting staff be prepared to discuss an agenda item titled “Policy on Documentation of Water Credit.” The item will not be specific to the IMAX project. The purpose is to discuss what is an appealable decision, how long is the decision in effect, and can a decision be reconsidered. A policy should be established so that a situation similar to issuance of the IMAX water credit does not occur again.
The concerns expressed about IMAX project were that in 1999 District staff issued a letter authorizing a water credit. There was a ten-day period to appeal the decision, but no public notification of that decision. The water credit was issued in 2002. Between 1999 and 2002, the issues surrounding the water credit should have been dealt with. A wrong decision should not remain in effect indefinitely. Once a decision is made, if new information is brought forth that could affect the decision, it should be reconsidered.
The committee requested that an update on this item be provided at a future meeting of more information is available.
The committee requested that the item be brought forward to a future meeting.
Chair Erickson stated that this item could be brought forward to a future meeting at the request of any committee member.
h. Assisted Living Water Use Factor Survey
District staff recommended that the item be considered at the next Water Demand Committee meeting. Further information must be collected on the issue. Staff has questions that must be answered by the committee before a study can begin regarding how the factor is to be developed. District staff will need to obtain permission from assisted living project operators to utilize their water consumption records.
i.
Earthbound Farms Farm Stand Expansion
District staff advised the committee that Earthbound Farms submitted an application for an expansion of use. They later withdrew their application. Monterey County issued a building permit for the project after the application had been withdrawn. The District will send out a letter stating that the new building cannot be occupied until a water permit is obtained.
The committee members expressed objections to the study and confirmed that it is still a draft and should not be formally received by the Board. The committee recommended that the item be brought to a future Water Demand Committee for discussion.
4. Action
Items
Directors Erickson and Lehman agreed that a
toilet/bidet combination should be given credit for two fixtures if the toilet
and bidet are separately plumbed and if there is historic use of the
fixture. If the District receives any
other requests for water use credit for toilet/bidet combinations, staff will
advise the Board. The Directors expressed concern that
offering credit for two fixtures might result in the un-permitted installation
of toilet/bidet combination units.
However, the Directors decided that requiring dual plumbing and proof of
historic use would be adequate safeguards.
Director Lehman stressed the importance of the applicant providing proof
of historic use for the fixture.
Comments from the public.
Virginia Colister urged the committee to recommend that toilet/bidet
combination units receive credit for two fixtures. She noted that her combination unit does not contain a
manufacturer’s insignia, so there is no way to prove when the unit was
installed.
b. Discuss
Process for Documenting Commercial Water Use Credits Related to On-Site
Retrofits
During
the discussion on this item, the meeting was adjourned at 8:20 AM and
reconvened at 8:45 AM. Director Henson
joined the discussion when the meeting reconvened.
Directors
Erickson, Henson and Lehman agreed that if an application for water use credit
includes fixtures that District staff has expertise in dealing with, staff
should proceed to calculate that credit.
If staff does not have the expertise or previous experience to calculate
that credit, or there is some circumstance that makes the situation unusual, a
consultant should be retained to calculate the water use credit. If the fixtures represent new technology or
a new approach that staff is unfamiliar with, the applicant should be advised
immediately that staff is unable to make a determination on the credit. The issue should then be brought to the
Water Demand Committee or the Board as soon as possible for direction. When water credit is granted, the applicant
should agree to provide Cal-Am consumption records in perpetuity. As for calculating water use, Cal-Am
historic records only provide part of the information needed.
During
the discussion, it was stated that referral to a consultant is only necessary
the first time a new technology is presented.
The goal is to obtain guidance from a consultant that can be used the
next time that technology is presented.
The water use calculations for a specific water fixture should be
obtained from an independent source, not the manufacturer. There was a suggestion from the public that
staff might issue a “provisional” permit prior to completion of a consultant
report on water use. The Directors
commented that an “incremental or component” approach might be better. If an applicant has completed plans for a
project and staff can quantify water savings in one area, but needs advise in
another, it might be possible for the project to move ahead with the water
credit that is quantifiable. This
method might be utilized for a project that can be constructed in phases. Staff noted that the District has a list of
fixtures with documented water use credit factors for residential projects, but
a list has not been developed for commercial projects. It would be useful for applicants to have
the information for commercial projects.
It was also noted that a policy manual should be developed that
describes how water credit is calculated, and what fixtures are a source of
water waste. For instance, should
credit be given for a fountain if it contributes to water waste? Director Erickson noted that the issue of water
use for commercial fixtures will be discussed at a future Water Demand Committee
meeting.
Comments
from the Public: Charles Eldred
stated that staff needs clear guidelines so that they can advise applicants on
how to proceed. Upon filing his
application with the District, he was advised that no water credit issues
applied. However, after he went through
the building and planning department process, he was told that he must provide
water use calculations. Bill Gamble
suggested that the Board grant him a provisional water permit for his
project. He also stated that deed restrictions
were onerous, and should be limited to granting the District authorization to
inspect the property.
The item was deferred to a future Water Demand Committee meeting.
d. Discuss
Hotel Water Use Factors for New Construction and Remodels
The committee members agreed that estimating water use for hotels should be handled as follows: (1) abolish luxury hotel classification; (2) base estimated water use on standard hotel factor; (3) figure landscaping and other components such as pools, oversized tubs, beauty salons, and restaurants separately, (4) office space and common areas could be calculated as Group I space; and (6) the Board should be advised when a hotel or controversial project is brought to staff for extension of water use credit, or a new permit. The General Manager should be kept apprised of applications that require ministerial approval. The Committee will make a determination in the future on how to assess the water capacity for meeting room/banquet room space that is served by an on-site kitchen. The Committee will also discuss at a future meeting the procedure for updating the hotel water use factor.
Comments from the public. Russ Hasley, representing Cypress Point Inn, disagreed with the District’s initial estimate of water use credit for the hotel. Six of the motel rooms are two-bedroom suites with a bathroom, kitchen and hot tub. Mr. Hasley requested that the two-bedroom suites be calculated as 2 hotel rooms. In addition, water credit should be granted for abandoning a boiler system that was used to heat the rooms. Mr. Hasley asked that he be granted water use credit equal to one hotel room, for each of the nine recreational vehicle hookups that are being abandoned. Rick Medina, City of Seaside, advised the committee that the City submitted a letter to the District dated March 27, 2003 requesting direction on how to assess the estimated water use for a new hotel on Del Monte Blvd. He asked that the District reply to the letter.
In regards to the issues raised by Russ Hasley, Director Erickson stated that the water credit for a two-bedroom suite should be based on the number of bedrooms and the factor for a large bathtub, if applicable. The committee did not have sufficient information to make a determination on the appropriate water use credit for abandonment of recreational vehicle hookups. District staff noted that a recreational vehicle park factor is in effect.
In regards to the concern expressed by Mr. Medina, the committee recommended that the applicant prepare a preliminary estimate of water capacity based on the standard hotel room factor, plus the estimated water use for all other components including outdoor landscaping and oversized tubs. However, the applicant should understand that this method would only be used for a preliminary estimate, there is no guarantee that the final estimate of hotel water use capacity will be calculated by this method.
The meeting was recessed between 9:55 AM and 10:00 AM
e.
Review Administrative Procedure for Commercial Portable
Fixtures
The committee provided direction to staff
regarding processing a request to permit the installation of a portable
commercial hydrotherapy tub. Staff was
advised to assess the new hydrotherapy tub at 5 fixture units; however, no
water credit will be granted for removal of existing tubs because they were
installed without benefit of a water permit.
Staff was directed to work with the applicant to determine how the 5
fixture units could be offset by other conservation measures that are planned
for the project. If the applicant
decides to install a different type of tub, the committee will need to consider
this issue again. The Committee will
need to meet again to consider changes to the District policy regarding
commercial portable fixtures.
There was general agreement among the committee
members that if a commercial spa utilizes portable tubs that were permitted,
and a historical use can be proven, then water credit should be granted for use
on that site. Businesses such as
physical therapy offices are now a Group I use. It was suggested that if they utilize hydrotherapy and have a
high water use, they should be assigned to a different Group category.
5.
Other Items
a.
Discuss Request for Proposals for Preparation of an EIR
on the Water Credit Transfer Program
The committee reviewed a document presented by Henrietta Stern entitled: Notes for: Consider RFP for Preparation of EIR on Water Credit Transfer Program (WCTP) that was reviewed by the Administrative Committee on May 14, 2003. The Water Demand Committee adopted the recommendations outlined in the document with a change to the wording in the section entitled “CORRECTIONS” to state, “Applications received 30 days prior to the completion of the administrative draft EIR will be included in the No Project alternative….”
6.
Director Comments and Future Agenda Items
The committee did not address these items.
a.
Review and Provide Direction on Assisted Living Water
Use Factor Survey
b.
Provide Direction on 2-Liter Toilet
Efficiency/Satisfaction Survey
c.
Review Amendments to Table 1: Residential Fixture Unit
Count
d.
Consider Expanded Rebate Program (Ordinance No. 94)
e.
Provide Direction on Amending Baseline Conservation
Requirements
f.
Review and Recommend Modifications to Regulation 6-Fees
7.
Set Future Meeting Date
The committee will meet on June 19 at 4 PM; June 24 at 8 AM; July 24 at 4 PM and August 21 at 4 PM.
8. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at approximately 12:00 PM.
U:\staff\word\boardpacket\2003\2003boardpacket\20031020\InfoItems\4\item4_exh4a.doc