October 12, 2008 Patterson, CA

Search

Polls

Latest Forum Posts

Re:Football
unclebuck 07-10-08 15:24
Re:Football
unclebuck 02-10-08 12:59
Re:Football
adr5ram4 26-09-08 00:41

Login Form






Lost Password?
No account yet? Register
Patterson searches for water solutions Print E-mail
Written by John Saiz | Patterson Irrigator   
Friday, 27 June 2008

“Regardless of growth, the city’s water quality will degrade. The current system is not sustainable.”


— Cort Abney
Member of H20 Group



Even if the city doesn’t grow, it’s likely to run short of drinking water within a few years, the city’s water consultant told the City Council on Tuesday.

Image
Alternatives: City officials hope to use water from sources whose quality isn’t up to drinking standards — including Well 4, above, which was closed last spring because of high nitrate levels — to irrigate parks and other landscaping as a way to conserve drinking water. Photo by Elias Funez/Patterson Irrigator
Cort Abney of the H20 Group has warned about the looming shortage since 2006, when his firm produced a Water Supply Planning Study for the city. In that document, Abney outlines the city’s diminishing water quality and ways Patterson City Council can deal with it.

It’s difficult to predict when demand for drinking water will exceed the city’s supplies, Abney said, but near 2012 is a reasonable guess.

“Regardless of growth, the city’s water quality will degrade,” Abney said. “The current system is not sustainable.”

The council, which commissioned the report, called a special meeting Tuesday to hear about how to conserve drinking water by setting up a non-potable water system. Such a system would provide water that is below state standards for drinking to keep up landscaping at parks, schools and commercial areas.

The city now uses drinkable water to irrigate close to 420 acres of greenery, not including residential property.

At peak demand, the city supplies about 5 million gallons of water a day. The city hopes about 33 percent of that could be handled by the non-potable system.

“It will allow the good water to go further,” Abney said.

He estimated the system would cost close to $16.6 million to set up.

How the council would pay for it has not been determined, said City Canager Cleve Morris. City staff is working to create a funding plan that would keep water rates the same, he said, and he plans to unveil it at a council meeting in July or August.

Restarting a defunct well could get the program going. Patterson’s public works department took one of the city’s wells out of service in May 2007, when mineral salts called nitrates exceeded state safety standards.

Though California law states the water isn’t good for drinking, it could be used for landscaping.

Abney expects more city wells will face similar problems as nitrate levels in the groundwater increase. The nitrates are a result of fertilizers, he said.

“When the well came up high with nitrate contamination, we thought if we had a separate system, we could still use the well,” Abney said.

As more wells become unusable for drinking water, they can be switched over to supply the non-potable system. Abney estimated the system would require seven wells. The city currently has seven wells delivering drinking water to residents.

By 2016, the project would be complete and could be connected to the city’s future wastewater treatment plant. Due to an anticipated increase in state standards, the plant will likely start treating wastewater to a level that is acceptable for landscaping. The new system would allow the city to distribute the reclaimed water.

Under Tuesday’s proposal, homes would not receive non-potable water. However, future residential development might be required to use it, Morris said.

The non-potable system is just the start of a $95 million water program Abney has outlined for the council. The heart of that system would be a water treatment facility.

If the council follows Abney’s recommendation to build a water treatment plant, the non-potable system should create a cost savings, because the city would treat less water and the plant would be less extensive.

Abney estimated a one-time savings of about $4.2 million and an annual savings of about $300,000. 

Treating water would allow Patterson to continue to use reliable supplies of well water, even with increasing nitrate levels. At the moment, Patterson’s only source of water is wells. A treatment plant would also give the city the option to buy and treat surface water.

To reach John Saiz at the Irrigator, call 892-6187 or e-mail him at This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

Comments (0)add
Write comment
quote
bold
italicize
underline
strike
url
image
quote
quote
smile
wink
laugh
grin
angry
sad
shocked
cool
tongue
kiss
cry
smaller | bigger

busy