water distribution peaking factor
DESCRIPTION
1/27 Town Council Strategic Planning Session PresentationTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Water Distribution Peaking Factor](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022073106/577cc03c1a28aba7118f5ad3/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Water Distribution Water Distribution
Peaking Factor
1
![Page 2: Water Distribution Peaking Factor](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022073106/577cc03c1a28aba7118f5ad3/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Town of Prosper“a place where everyone matters”
North Texas Municipal Water District (NTMWD)
p y
Reservoir Elevations as of December 28, 2014
S l R i C ti C t El ti DSupply Reservoir ConservationPool Elevation
Current Elevation (msl)
Down
Lavon Lake 492.00’ 479.09’ -12.91’
Jim Chapman Lake 440.00’ 427.45’ -12.55’
Lake Tawakoni 437.50’ 425.49’ -12.01’
Lake Texoma 617.00’ 611.42’ -5.58’
![Page 3: Water Distribution Peaking Factor](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022073106/577cc03c1a28aba7118f5ad3/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Town of Prosper“a place where everyone matters”
Peaking Factor: Calculation based on the comparison of the
p y
amount of water used on a maximum day versus an averageday. The 2011 CIP Update showed the peaking factordeclining to 2.5 by 2044 (Buildout).g y ( )
Historical: 2008(3.6), 2009(3.3), 2010(3.4), 2011(2.1),2012(2.0), 2013(1.9)( ) ( ) ( )
How to reduce the Peaking Factor: Water ConservationBenefits to a reduction in the Peaking Factor:1. Delay timing of CIP Infrastructure and decrease in size
of ultimate Town facilities.2. Prevent future extreme “take or pay” limit on waterp y
contract with provide.
![Page 4: Water Distribution Peaking Factor](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022073106/577cc03c1a28aba7118f5ad3/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Town of Prosper“a place where everyone matters”
Other Municipalities Peaking Factors:
p y
• City of Frisco = 2.5 for residential, 2.0 for non-residential• Little Elm = 2.2
Denton and Princeton = 2 0• Denton and Princeton = 2.0• McKinney – doesn’t use average day demand in planning
but based on their calculations their peaking factor is p garound 2.4 – 2.5
* Town’s recently amended contact with NTMWD included a lower Town s recently amended contact with NTMWD included a lower peaking factor from the previous contract.
![Page 5: Water Distribution Peaking Factor](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022073106/577cc03c1a28aba7118f5ad3/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Town of Prosper“a place where everyone matters”
1. Delay timing of CIP Infrastructure and ultimate size of Town facilities:
p y
Town facilities: (example: decreasing peaking factor from 2.5 to 2.0)
• Ground Storage• Ultimately you would need 15 MG of ground storage instead of 18 MG shown in the • Ultimately you would need 15 MG of ground storage instead of 18 MG shown in the
2011 CIP Update. With the recently constructed 5 MG GST, additional ground storage isn’t needed to be in service until 2030 compared to 2024 in the 2011 CIP Update. ($1,250,000)
• Pumping• Pumping• Ultimately need 25 MGD of firm pumping capacity to UPP instead of 30 MGD shown
in the 2011 CIP Update. ($250,000)• Ultimately need 35 MGD of firm pumping capacity to LPP instead of 40 MGD shown
in the 2011 CIP Update ($250 000)in the 2011 CIP Update. ($250,000)• Elevated Storage
• Ultimately need 3 MG of elevated storage in the UPP instead of 4 MG shown in the 2011 CIP Update. Prosper Trail EST is recommended to be in service in 2018 instead
f 2015 h i th 2011 CIP U d t ($1 000 000)of 2015 as shown in the 2011 CIP Update. ($1,000,000)• Ultimately need 5 MG of elevated storage in the LPP (same as 2011 CIP Update).
![Page 6: Water Distribution Peaking Factor](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022073106/577cc03c1a28aba7118f5ad3/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Town of Prosper“a place where everyone matters”
2. Prevent extreme “take or pay” limit on water contract:• City of Plano
p y
y• Contract = 73.2 MGD• 2001 Usage = 73 MGD• 2013 Usage = 53 MGD• Difference of 7.373 Billion Gallons/Year paid for but not used. = $13.8 M
(M b Ci R i l $1 87/1 000 ll )• (Member City Rate is currently $1.87/1,000 gallons water)• City of Richardson
• Contract = 30.2 MGD• 2000 Usage = 29.4 MGD
2013 U 21 8 MGD• 2013 Usage = 21.8 MGD• Difference of 3.066 Billion Gallons/Year paid for but not used. = $5.7 M
• City of Mesquite• Contract = 22.7 MGD
2000 U 21 1 MGD• 2000 Usage = 21.1 MGD• 2013 Usage = 15.5 MGD• Difference of 2.628 Billion Gallons/Year paid for but not used. = $4.9 M
* City of Allen is great example of a municipality nearing buildout that is taking Water y g p p y g gConservation seriously to prevent this from happening.
![Page 7: Water Distribution Peaking Factor](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022073106/577cc03c1a28aba7118f5ad3/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Town of Prosper“a place where everyone matters”
Staff comments:
p y
• Water Conservation is needed to not only protect the water sources but to encourage proper use of the water resources.
• Once a week watering is adequate if done correctly.
• Cost savings are immediate and long term.
P d Pl f A iProposed Plan of Action:• Continue to encourage Water Conservation in summer 2015 and monitor
through technology.through technology.
• Update the Impact Fee and CIP in 2016 with a recommendation on a suitablepeaking factor and impact it will have on the Town’s infrastructure.
• Implement an updated policy of education and enforcement to controlpeaking factor with 2016 Impact Fee and CIP Update.
![Page 8: Water Distribution Peaking Factor](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022073106/577cc03c1a28aba7118f5ad3/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)